Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Church’s opposition to equal marriage ‘disastrous’, senior bishop says

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. I like it when these religious ones are on our side, these are the ones who should be leading the church, not old out of touch idiots like they currently have

    1. All the revolutions come from inside the system and this one is most welcome. Bless them Amen!

  2. A very insightful and honest view of the situation.

    Bishop Holtam has a history of supporting LGBT rights. He is clearly a wise man that can see the likely damage that other senior churchmen and others are doing by their opposition to equality.

  3. again a load of trollop saying that 2 men or women are unfit to bring up a kid… the church however would not mind if the exact same people were parents with the only difference being their sexual orientation. Or the fact that they support worse people being parents simply because they are straight.

    Whatever happened to whatever is best for the child, in terms of home environment and fitness to be parents and the child’s individual needs and who better to judge then the state whos care they are currently in.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 22 Apr 2012, 8:43pm

      They never condemn widows and widowers raising children without a spouse or those who’ve divorced and raising children on their own. Then we have single unwed mothers, never a harsh word spoken against them either as long as they’re straight. It’s all about homophobia and they can’t even be honest about that and they call themselves ‘christians?’ NOT!

    2. Interestingly enough James, the late Pope John Paul 1 (not the pious old Pole) agreed with everything you said. Unfortunately, he only led the Vatican during September 1978 before dying suddenly during the night. We all know who and what came next.

      1. Actually, you probably agree with what he said!!!

      2. was probably murdered by his own.

      3. My 80 something neighbour here in Australia who is an ex-nun raves about Pope John Paul 1 and is really disappointed with how the Catholic church has gone backwards.

        say something I think…

  4. chris lowcase 22 Apr 2012, 7:45pm

    “bang on” as we say in’t north.

    hes part of the change the church needs to see. hes absolutely right when he suggests that the church is stance is driving a wedge between them and society. not afriad to question his faith and hes very honest about the wrong doing carried out in his name. which i have a massive amount of respect for.

    1. chris lowcase 22 Apr 2012, 7:47pm

      ‘wrong doings carried out in his name’… i didnt mean to say that. i was talking about the church, in regards to things like slavery.

  5. Has the “Enlightenment” finally cracked the Anglican camp? Whoo- hoo! Come on in – it must be hard and heavy bearing such hatred towards us – lighten the load – we forgive you – yes, we know all about this – we have a history too! Nice one chappie!

  6. Personally I feel you have got to respect the guy for sticking his head way way above the parapet and saying what he has.

    I’m sure its not popular in some circles, but does indicate that there are at least a few senior people in the church who know what day of the week it is.

  7. Good for him ! He’s recognized the issue, and he’s doing something about it.

    Principled man.

  8. Robert in S. Kensington 22 Apr 2012, 8:41pm

    Thank you, Bishop Holtam. I admire him a great deal for having the courage to speak up. I just hope there is no retaliation against him or the other bishops who support us.

    What will be even more disastrous for the Anglican church will be if it comes down hard on consecrating any more openly gay bishops which would mean a possible schism between the Episcopalians and the Anglicans. I’m hoping it comes about, it’s long over due.

  9. GingerlyColors 22 Apr 2012, 8:53pm

    The Catholic Church, the Church of England, the Jewish faith, the tide of change is gathering pace. Those who are still out of touch are like King Canute, trying in vain to reverse that tide. There are even Muslim voices, albiet small, but growing, in our favour. It can only get better.

  10. What, precisely, does the catholic church know about marriage, seeing none of them are allowed to engage in it???

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 23 Apr 2012, 2:13pm

      What does it know about human relationships? What does it know about being a ‘christian’? Precious little.

  11. Naranda (Jorden) 22 Apr 2012, 10:10pm

    “Let he without sin cast the first stone!” In other words everyone has sin and cnt condem some one because of there so called sin of being GAY!! So many people have sin that is never nationalized or spoken of because they pretend it never happened All because they are ashamed of think It’s nt a big deal because it something small a sin is a sin and the little sins that aren’t spoken about out way someone being homosexual by MILES!!!

    1. Homosexuality isn’t a sin at all so that post makes no sense

    2. There is no such thing as “sin”. It is not a valid concept with any kind of real-world referent.

  12. I agree. If you follow the evil laws in the Bible, you’ll end up with homophobic, sexist, violent, and racist views. It’s time to come out the dark ages and not let a multi thousand year old book guide your morals. Religious people/buildings/etc against same sex marriage and LGB rights should have no say in the matter, especially in countries with freedom of religion, such as the US and the UK. Having same sex marriage will have no negative affect on society, it will only have a positive affect.

    I hope that someday people look down upon homophobia like they do racism now!

    1. And transphobia too, right Lumi?

      1. Nope

        1. Do you have any Trans friends, or have you ever actually sat down with a trans person? While yes going through any form of surgery is a choice their being born the way they are is not. Sound familiar?

          We cannot expect to be able to say we cannot help the way we are and we should not be discriminated against then at the same time feel it fair to do the same to others

        2. I wouldn’t be friends with a transperson. Even if I talked to one, I would still disagree with what they’re doing.
          My mind won’t change on the topic of transgenderism. It’s a choice to do a horrible thing.

          1. So you have never had contact with a person of the Trans community yet you feel it acceptable to stand there and judge them, state it’s a choice it’s wrong blah blah blah.

            Yet at the same time say to those who seek to judge you, say who you are is a choice etc are wrong. On what basis do you justify this point of view?

          2. “I wouldn’t be friends with a transperson”

            WTF?

            You are a disgusting human being. Really, really vile.

        3. You should be ashamed of yourself Lumi.

          It is none of your business what people do with their bodies.

          To say “Even if I talked to one, I would still disagree with what they’re doing” marks you out as close-minded and intolerant.

          1. So do support the right for people to do hard drugs? Do you think it’s moral for people to cut and carve their bodies for fun?

            I’m not going to tolerate something like transgenderism

          2. It’s my business because
            1. People should be seeking mental help, not mutilating their bodies
            2. It’s an insult to me as a woman that some man can pretend to be a woman, and going in my dressing room, etc

            Even so, you people are the ones that brought this subject up. You already know my views on it, so don’t bother commenting on topics that have to do with homosexuality and bisexuality about it.

          3. It certainly does mark Lumi out as closed minded, blinkered and intolerant.

          4. “So do support the right for people to do hard drugs?”. Yes, providing they do no harm to other people. This rarely happens, hence the general proscription of hard drugs.

            “Do you think it’s moral for people to cut and carve their bodies for fun?”. It is not a question of morals. It is their business, and it is not yours. What someone wishes to do to their bodies does not harm with anyone else or interfere with their lives.

            “I’m not going to tolerate something like transgenderism.”. So what are you doing about it then ?

          5. When it comes to transgenderism, I’m intolerant, yes, but on other subjects, no.

          6. “It’s my business because
            1. People should be seeking mental help, not mutilating their bodies
            2. It’s an insult to me as a woman that some man can pretend to be a woman, and going in my dressing room, etc”

            Let’s tweak this slightly shall we?

            It’s my business because
            1. People should be seeking mental help, not engaging in sinful behaviour which is harmful to their spirit
            2. It’s an insult to me as a woman that some woman who could be lusting after me could be going in my dressing room, etc

            What’s the difference really?

          7. Wow, even if they were doing no harm to other people, it’s still wrong and they’re still doing harm to themselves.

            I don’t care if you think it’s none of my business, it’s still WRONG. Whether it’s drugs, cutting, transgenderism.

            I’m going to be anti-trans for the rest of my life

          8. Body mutilation is real. Homosexuality being a sin is not.

            I’m not saying transpeople are predators at all. I know that most aren’t. What I’m saying is men shouldn’t be allowed in a men’s dressing room, because they’re men. Straight men, bi men, gay men, transwomen, it doesn’t matter since they’re men.

          9. And just what is your definition of a man Lumi ?

          10. A man is someone who is assigned the gender of male- male DNA and male body

          11. I’m shocked that someone who has experienced prejudice can be prejudiced themselves! We were all together in the Stonewall Inn: you pick-on one of us and you pick on us all. As Harry said, “You should be ashamed of yourself Lumi.”

    2. Since you people have such an issue with my views on transgenderism then don’t bring it up on articles that have to do with sexual orientation! Plain and simple.

      There’s a time and place to disagree with the subject.

      1. Oh don’t take it personally Lumi. I have an issue with all intolerant, narrow minded, nasty little bigots.

        There’s no measure on bigotry. One area is enough to make you a bigot, and you are.

        1. Like I said, if you don’t like it then don’t bring it up. I didn’t mention transgenderism, Oonai did.

          1. And I will continue to challenge you on it Lumi because you are a disgusting bigot. Don’t preach for your own equility while believing others don’t deserve it.

          2. “And I will continue to challenge you on it Lumi because you are a disgusting bigot.”

            Totally agree with that. She is vile creature.

        2. Well get used to being challenged.

          Until you can produce a cogent argument for your view.

          1. I’m not going to change my views on it, so there’s no point to bring it up in the comment section of an article that has nothing to do with it.

            It’s your views that are the problem, you don’t even know what a simple think such as gender is and you think people doing drugs, cutting for fun, and transgenderism is fine

          2. “I’m not going to change my views” – the catch phrase of the closed mind.

            What ever you may think, gender is not simple.

            You misrepresent my views on drugs and cutting.

          3. “I’m not going to change my views on it”

            Yeah, that’s the religious brainwashing she underwent…. the result of a weak mind. A VERY weak mind.

  13. Whenever I hear anti-gay people telling everyone to think of the children, I think of the likes of Kenneth Wieshuhn http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2012/04/17/gay-teen-from-iowa-commits-suicide/

    Who among them thought of him? Who among them was protecting him?

    1. The ones who whine about the kids don’t care about LBGT kids, if they did then they wouldn’t support and push a homophobic agenda

      1. Exactly. Just like the ones who whine about “pro-family” bullsh1t couldn’t care less about GLBT families. For them the only families and kids that count are straight.

  14. Catholic priests distributed during Mass today a leaflet urging worshipers to campaign against marriage equality. One statement reads: “The Church is opposing the Government’s policy because it cares for the common good of society.”

    +++++++++

    If that were so, then why is the RC church not supporting universal human rights?

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 23 Apr 2012, 2:11pm

      And why are the CoE and RC denominations not condemning homophobic bullying in schools and reaching out to young gay children committing suicide as a result? Both have been responsible for institutionalised homophobia in every western country, yet they show no compassion, no caring, no humanity. They’re the hypocrites of the worst kind and hardly what could be construed as ‘christian’ in any way shape or form. ‘Christian’ in name only and that’s it.

    2. No such propaganda in my Catholic parish church!
      Martin

  15. Roll up roll up, all ye that are assembled and come see the hilarious circus side show that is the transphobe known only as “Lumi Blast”
    Watch her spout refutations that we should leave bigotry in the dark ages, without realising that she should perhaps heed her own advice.
    She is the walking awkward,
    A monstrous paradox of person,
    So I say to ye all,
    ROLL UP, ROLL UP.

    (Isn’t nice when the religious, you know the ones that are supposed to all “fire and brimstone for faggots” are outdone, nay thoroughly beaten by one of our own?)

    So 3 cheers to Bishop of Salisbury, the Rt Rev Nicholas Holtam, for today, I think he has earned that title.

    1. Circus side show? Yeah, that makes ZERO sense

      You don’t even know me LOL, you know nothing about me or how I am outside of my views on transgenderism, because that’s all you’re judging me on

      I’m talking about bigotry towards homosexuals, bisexuals, and women, and bigotry of religions

      I’m actually a good person, thank you!

      1. A good person? I nearly choked on my drink then. Thanks for the belly laugh Lumi!

    2. @Lumi – we know you through your published views.

      And your claim of being a good person is hard to sustain because of some of them.

  16. “Society should support the best means of raising the next generation”

    This must be so insulting to so many people not just LGBT people. I also thin it stigimitzes children who aren’t brought up in that perfect image of a chatholic family.

    I hope Ben Bradshaw is now beginning to see why marriage is important for all of us. Why he has chosen to bat for the wrong side of the Anglican church is beyond me.

  17. ARGH!!!
    As nice as it is to hear someone from the church hierarchy give support for anything LGBT, there are NO passages in the Bile that refer to homosexuality!!!

    It drives me absolutely up the wall when people refer to the Bible as containing passages condemning homosexuality.

    There is not a single passage in the original Hebrew or Greek that has anything to say about homosexuality.

  18. As Jesus did not mention homosexuality, it cannot be essential to his teachings.
    To condemn homosexuality, you must use parts of the Bible you don’t yourself obey. Anyone who obeyed every part of Leviticus would rightly be put in prison.
    It is no longer your personal religious view if you’re bothering someone else with it.

    1. “The angel in Jude verse 7 condemned homosexuality and sexual depravity. That angel was Jesus.”

      The angel is in your head, or the result of a bottle of JD….

      1. It’s the voices in his head, Will. That’s why he speaks with such authority. In fact he’s probably God, don’t you know?

        1. His voice seems to have lost resonance though!

  19. Paddyswurds 23 Apr 2012, 9:57am

    Can we have a list of the rc churches that handed out the leaflets yesterday, please. We really outh to know this so we can bring pressure to bear where it will be most acutely felt.

  20. Paddyswurds 23 Apr 2012, 10:12am

    We really should make sure we keep the xtian clamour to preserve slavery because it was “in the bible” and was the will of “god” . That way we will get a lot of black people on our side who would otherwise be in opposition. It is amazing how many black people do not know the history of slavery and the Churches part in it. They even threatened to excommunicate Wilberforce because of his efforts to abolish slavery. Then we also have the churches efforts to prevent inter racial marriage and the disgraceful and racist campaign to stop it. This is just the latest battle for an organisation, that while it preaches that it is for equality and love, is actually the most divisive and hate filled tyranny left on this planet.

    1. Paddyswurds 23 Apr 2012, 9:34pm

      errata…
      ….this “We really should make sure we keep the xtian clamour to preserve slavery because it was “in the bible” and was the will of “god” .”
      should say “We really should make sure we keep the xtian clamour to preserve slavery in the limelight because it was “in the bible” and was the “will of god” .

  21. Paddyswurds 23 Apr 2012, 10:31am

    Where are my F*****g posts gone again. This is getting beyond ridiculous……………and as soon as i post this they will reappear…grrrrrrrrrrr

    1. chris lowcase 23 Apr 2012, 8:02pm

      refresh the page. its f5 on my browser though im not sure if its universal.:P

      im not sure why it happens but it seems its the only way of seeing very recent posts.

  22. Gary Barbosa-Strickland 23 Apr 2012, 2:39pm

    Yes we know all about the catholic priests best way off raising the next generation. Ask all the boys who have been MOLESTED by catholic priests if they think they were raised the best way.

    1. Paddyswurds 23 Apr 2012, 9:37pm

      Boys and Girls, Gary, Boys and Girls. They were first and foremost paedophiles and secondly RC priests.

  23. Here is another disaster, http://hrc.org/nomexposed

  24. It is especially ironic that some use polygamy as an example of the erosion of traditional marriage when historically, and biblically, polygamy was a perfectly acceptable traditional form of marriage. When marriage was redefined from “one man and many women” to “one man and one woman,” was there a public outcry like we are seeing today in the same-sex marriage debate? Perhaps marital erosion began when society switched from polygamy to monogamy? Opponents of gay marriage argue that same-sex marriage undermines traditional marriage because the purpose of marriage is to bear children. In that case, the traditional marital purpose of bearing children is more likely to be fulfilled in a polygamous marriage than a monogamous heterosexual marriage. Having multiple spouses increases the probability of childbearing. Polygamy seems to advance the goal of procreation far more than monogamous, heterosexual marriage. The claim that homosexuality is unnatural is also an argument against same sex

    1. marriage and, incidentally, an argument one could use to support polygamy in place of monogamy. When society switched to monogamy, I imagine people argued that it is unnatural for a man to be with only one woman, and that therefore, redefining marriage from polygamy to monogamy upsets the natural order of things. After all, man has been with many women since the beginning of time. Why tamper with the natural order?

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 23 Apr 2012, 8:05pm

      Opponents of same-sex civil marriage who ague that marriage is primarily for procreation would have to support a ban on infertile hetero couples and those choosing not to procreate and those (women) who are beyond child-bearing age. Civil marriage does not mandate procreation, no mention of it during the marriage ceremony and definitely no mention of religion. So how on earth can they claim that equal civil marriage harms the religious or civil marriage. Same gender couples marrying hardly impacts or inhibits heterosexual from marrying or procreating, they continue to do so without any help or hindrance from us. I wish they’d provide the evidence first before resorting to the more than spurious claims regarding polygamy, incest and bestiality as a result of equal civil marriage. Who would demand all three when they’re already illegal in most civilised societies? No government would legislate for any of it.

  25. The arguments against polygamy don’t stem from Judeo-Christian-Muslim values against same-sex marriage (values that historically permit polygamy!) but rather from the provable societal dangers associated with polygamy.

  26. There isn’t a shred of modern sociological evidence to support the claim that gay marriage is harmful to society, whereas there is a plethora of historical and contemporary evidence to illustrate the dangers associated with polygamy. One could even argue that there is less of a power imbalance in same-sex couples compared with opposite-sex couples, because both spouses are of the same sex. With opposite-sex couples, there is arguably a greater power imbalance because men are generally physically stronger than women. The bottom line is that the rate of domestic violence in both gay and straight marriage is basically the same. Aside from gender, the unions are exactly the same. Every circumstance needs to be judged on its own merits. When looking at incest, for instance, it is quite clear that permitting consanguineous relationships will lead to power imbalances, psychological damage, sexual abuse, and a high rate of genetic diseases. Again, the basis for society’s objection is not a

    1. religious one based on “family values” but one based on provable harm to society. The same cannot be said of two same-sex consenting adults getting married. Where is the evidence that children raised by gay parents are harmed? Where is the evidence that gay marriage will lead to the end of civilization? Show me one peer-reviewed, modern, mainstream study demonstrating the inherent dangers of gay marriage. You will not find it. It is of course also ludicrous to claim that gay marriage, or a homosexual relationship, between two consenting adults has any connection whatsoever to paedophilia. Minors do not have the capacity to consent to sexual contact with adults, whether in the heterosexual or homosexual context. What about bestiality? Animals and humans are different species. You can’t compare human-to-human relationships with human-to-animal relationships.

  27. Homo occidens 23 Apr 2012, 10:51pm

    Well said Bishop Holtam. I for one admire and respect you. The church both anglican and catholic needs more men like this good bishop.

  28. Robin Evans 24 Apr 2012, 12:57am

    The church is over, religion is over, it’s a last bastion for extremists and homophobes but other than that it is at the end of its time.

    Thank friggin god!!!!

  29. PeterinSydney 28 Apr 2012, 11:37pm

    Rev Hotlham should be the next Archbishop of Canterbury, and level the homophobe Sentamu in York for the rest of his miserable years.

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