She’s inciting hatred, as hatred would be the only reason why people would take to the streets to protest against a minority.
Yes, indeed she is. She’s inspired by the rally in Paris against equal marriage no doubt. I can’t believe she thinks if 100,000 took to the streets it would have any impact. She was also convinced that the legislation would never be approved on February 5th saying that the vast majority of the British public were against it. These religious nutters are always playing the bloody victim card. Nobody is discriminating against them, nobody is preventing them from worshipping or believing in any of the crap they subscribe to and nobody is going to stop getting married in church. So how on earth does she think her argument is valid? If equal marriage is going to plunder marriage as bigot Carey states, then why are heteros continuing to get married in church? Someone should take this bigoted old harridan down a peg or two. I don’t believe her when she says some Tories voted with Cameron out of loyalty, do you?
Her comment about Tories voting out of loyalty to Cameron is just her trying to discredit the overwhelming majority vote in the House of Commons. She knows very well that street protests won’t make any difference, it’s all to do with her wanting to be in the limelight and to stir-up a campaign for her to be at the front of. As GulliverUK has said below, she left out the word ‘peaceful’. Protests that are not stipulated as being ‘peaceful’ protests tend to conjure up images of rioting and civil disorder. Perhaps the omission is deliberate. As you point out, the fundamentalists are playing the victim card. ‘Christians’ being truncheoned by police officers is a situation she perhaps trying to create for them, because then they can really play the victim card. It is a sign of desperation as they have failed and they know it. They are now going to have a massive tantrum, or so she hopes.
And I am very sad too – that this vile old biatch is still alive!
The sky fairy doesn’t want her taking over and she is more use to the other fella where she is
These twerps must know this is primarily about equal CIVIL marriage.
She is the definition of bigotry.
What a misguided and nasty piece of work.
What business of christians is it if someone gets married? I’m straight and non christian. I can get married with Anne’s permission.
What this hateful old crow doesn’t realize is that we are taking NOTHING from anybody s beliefs.
They have every right to worship god, as does any other religion. What she doesn’t seem to get is that we want equality.
If she persuades “Christians” to take to the streets, you can bet your last pennies we would retaliate in kind.
These people hiding behind religion do not hold the monopoly on morality. It’s time they understood that.
This segregative mindset has no place in modern society, she should understand that or step from office
I’d doubt if any of them will take to the streets, they’d be exposing their faces to the entire country and people in support of equal marriage in their constituencies would know who they are. I’m not so sure if supporters of the legislation would retaliate in kind. A lot didn’t even bother to sign the consultation or Out4Marriage petition, let alone contact their MPs, including some of our own. She’s a frustrated bitter old biddy who can’t come to terms with the fact that the conservative goverment aproved it. Even though slightly more than half voted against, the number that voted for it was equally significant. I never expected them to be more than 50 at most, but 126 was really surprising, pleasantly so.
Oh blimey the witch is back.
Why would be be a need for when this is about Civil Marriage and those religions that wish to show how much better than Christians/Catholics they are.
The Only reason they are protesting is to have exclusive rights to discriminate and be above the law.
Also what she is calling for a yet another waste of taxpayers money since it will be taxpayers money that will pay for the police and the cleaning up.
Let’s not forget that France too is still pressing ahead… what what is the point exactly? Their Freedom to discriminate that’s what!
Yes, they should protest in the streets! Preferably in front of a conga line of snow plows!
(In Canada, when three or more snow plows are clearing all of the lanes of a highway at once in tandem, we call them a conga line. It gets us through the cold winters…)
The fact is Ann, they didn’t, did they? You can’t get annoyed at people for not giving enough of a shit to protest. Blame them, not us. Clearly, people aren’t THAT bothered.
I wonder why she wasn’t the first to take to the streets? Frustrated ugly old tiresome hate-mongering harridan!
She’s probably gay herself. She should grow up!
What? Like the Poll Tax riots, caused by the Thatcher dynasty? The government she was part of. This sad ancient dried up, never been loved, prune, should consider leading that march herself, if she can waddle in to position. The Anglican who became a Catholic because she couldn’t bear to have a women in a position of authority in the church. This dusty old bigot, who has no experience of romance or sex. She seems to have left out the word “peaceful”, and perhaps if they riot this old ruminoid will find herself behind bars for incitement to riot. Shall we cower if 200,000 protest? Not when 58,800,000 don’t, no we won’t. The majority support it, but maths was never Ann’s strong point – but what was? She will be remembered as one of the most vile Tory women of the last 30 years. In fact, scrub that, one of the most file women of the last 30 years. And that voice? It could shatter bullet-proof glass !
Up there with Baroness Cathain and Nadine Dorries.
“This sad ancient dried up, never been loved, prune, should consider leading that march herself, if she can waddle in to position.”
A nice line, Gulliver. Isn’t she utterly loathsome. The worst-possible incarnation of a spiteful mother figure imaginable!
Amazing isn’t it, that she’s not the first to take to the streets? She wants others to do it for her, lazy old cow. Even if they marched, it would only paint them as the delusional religious bigots and fools that they are. The last thing they want is for the public to treat them as a laughing stock and Widdecombe’s words would actually come to fruitiion, that they really don’t matter much and nobody cares about them. They’d really target themselves for scorn and contempt if anything as a fringe group. She should be very careful what she wishes for.
amazing that how all of a sudden someones personal religious beliefs NEED to be imposed on the whole of multi-cultural society … thats not the way it works – the conservative way is for the state to INCREASE personal choice for the wellbeing of society as a whole.
well seeing as most of them are ancient “christians” with one foot in the grave, and its minus 4 outside thats a great idea! pneumonia should get rid of most of them by end of week
Yes, because an old spinster’s opinions around marriage are obviously relevant.
I love her hair. Shows what a great sense of humour she must have…
Why doesn’t she just retire permanately to her cottage on remote Dartmoor. There she can happily be known as the retired Hound of the Basket-cases’….
Preferably on the M1, individually, at night… Jokes ;)
“The reason why governments keep on producing legislation which impacts heavily on Christians is because they do not think we matter very much.”
Out of the mouths of ex-politicians!!
How would she like to see people protesting against the catholic cult in the streets? She’d be the first to scream discrimination and hurl the incitement to hatred card. She’d better be careful what she wishes for, bigoted, sexless bitter old cow. Why doesn’t she just do us all a favour and drop dead?
LOL! Sorry, can’t stop laughing @ her doing us all a favour and dropping dead! It’s just the way you said it! :-D
Yes, I’d be the first to dance and pee on her grave after a good knees up! Even the worms and maggots would flee her smelly decrepid carcass, she’s that toxic.
Surely the headline should read: “Ugly old spinster moans: ‘If I can’t get married, why should the gays?’”
Oh excellent ! :D
There is always one who can see with such clarity that it makes the eyes water — RALMAO :)
We do not go out on the streets, protesting against Christians. Therefore: why should we be subject to protests from a small, vocal minority of right wing, fundamentalist, Christians? I always thought the message of Christianity was one of peace and love. All we have seen throughout this debate is Christianity represented as a vile, rabid cult, hell bent on suppressing the rights of others.
They keep saying that by giving the LGBT community rights, it somehow takes rights away from Christians. The good thing is that the fallacy of this argument is so obvious, that even your average Sun reader would have no problem, discerning the truth of the matter.
Under the proposed legislation Christians can
a) believe in what they wish to believe in
b) are free to practice the tenants of their faith freely, unless doing so conflicts with the duty’s of their chosen profession.
c) are free to say whatever they wish about anyone.
In short their right remain the same as before the EM legislation!
Ann Widdecombe, the world is changing for the better. Everyday, bile is sent our way from some nasty religious group on a daily basis, you are part of the distribution of hate, do try to learn from those who think we should live in the dark ages.
Anyone who’s against equal rights is a complete moron and should be deported to North Korea, where nobody has any rights.
I say deport the homosexuals to Korea and leave the normal folk where they are
And you think you’re normal? Risible!
So you don’t get tempted, Jon? ;) It’s like not buying cakes when you’re on a diet.
Well that would put an end to the North Korean food shortages…
Does she live in an alternative reality where those blood sports campaigners stopped the Blair Government’s plans for a ban on hunting with dogs? All I remember is a bunch of thugs in green wellies throwing their weight around without any result.
Ann is a Catholic now.
No shit Sherlock. Perhaps she’s trying to put herself forward as a candidate for the Papacy.
Regardless of what stupid nonsense she now believes, she’s always been a prudish bigot that nobody liked. She’s another Baroness Young or Anita Byant, but it’s clear that people aren’t a pushover like they once were, religion has no authority in society any more, and even more Christians think their church is, frankly pants these days. If it’s not sexual rape of children, abuse of women as slaves, priests raping nuns and parishioners, then it’s stuffy old farts denying women equal places in the church. Leaving out the liberal sides, Quakers, Unitarians, and some others, the right-wing lot have totally discredited religion, Ann along with them. People have had the debates and decided fox-hunting is barbaric and wrong, and preventing two people who are gay from marrying, is also wrong.
Perhaps Ann is just very lonely because the person inside is too ugly for anyone to every care about, so she finds causes to keep her busy, to take her mind off her pointless existence.
Little Unmarried Ann desperately craves attention, Gulliver. Just such a pity that after her embarrassing appearances on programmes like Strictly Come Dancing she is now reduced to trying to get the limelight focussed on herself again by spitting hatred at homosexual people. She feels confident about it though because she feels she has the support of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, the bastion of all moral authority in the world, despite it’s being riddled with child-abused priests and self-hating closeted homosexuals.
You’ve described it so well, Gulliver (‘It’ being Widdecombe aswell as religion).
Yes, a paedophile-ridden, mysoginistic cult responsible for some of the worst crimes against humanity starting with the Inquisition and the torture and execution of Jews under the Torquemadas as well as the subjugation of indigenous tribes for refusing to convert in what is now Latin America, many of them put to death for it. Let’s not forget the oppression and sexual abuse against young women in the care of the Magdelene sisters and priests in Ireland. Dumb arse!
It is so weird, christians who oppose love so much.
Westbro Widdecombe and her hating christians can protest all they wants, but the only funeral she will have any real power at is her own.
So take it and shove it, Westboro Widdecombe where the sun and god don’t shine.
eratta: Westboro Widdecombe
I hate that little box we have to type into.
Sad old bitch fxxx off and die
Shock, horror. Christian bigots who object/ refuse to marry same sex partners may be forced from their jobs; good. So they should. Thy are public employees and re there o serve the WHOLE community, not pick and choose. People who are obviously afraid of intimate contact in relationships should not be commenting on issues such as this. They project their own inhibited inadequacies on us – popes, priests, screwed up politicians… For goodness sake, she appeared in some crappy dance programme so is this the voice of reason and intelligence? No answer needed!
And iPads are rubbish for typing/ typos.
Vile bigoted troll. Have I left anything out?
I have to admit, I am an admirer of Ms Widdecombe, long before she became a Strictly Come Dancing sensation.
What she proposes makes sense, providing done within the law and without malicious intent.
I suspect, in the main at least, I agree with her views on same sex marriage and that does not make her or I homophobic bigots.
Sorry dear, I’m afraid it very much does…
Oh yes it does. According to the Oxford dictionary, bigot is defined as ‘having or revealing an obstinate belief in the superiority of one’s own opinions and a prejudiced intolerance of the opinions of others.’
Therefore, by your brilliant deduction, those of us calling for disestablishment and better yet disenfranchisement of religion aren’t anti-religious either. Nobody is forcing Widdecome to stop believing in her faith, preventing her from worshipping, stopping heteros from marrying in church. How on earth can two people of the same gender marrying in a registrar’s office or in a welcoming denomination affect her ability to believe, worship or, heaven forbid, marry in her church? The only people it affects are gay people, nobody else, not even you or her. BIGOT is an appropriate word and warranted. Religious and civil marriage are two totally different constructs, the latter redefined in the 19th century to accommodate hetero adulterers and divorced people…..
the antithesis of religious marriage.
Robert: I think we both agree on one thing – OED is an authoritative source for defining terms. As for “bigotry”, I suspect “having or revealing an obstinate belief in the superiority of one’s own opinions” might apply to both of us. As for “a prejudiced intolerance of the opinions of others”, is that not what you are doing in my/Ms Widdecombe’s case? I have thought long and hard on the subject of same sex marriage (and have considered carefully the views of PN readers). I have also written on the subject (unfortunately, not possible to include here due to space restrictions). I am not prejudiced toward or intolerant of gay folk, but I do have a carefully thought through position (thus the publication). When I get to heaven I will find out for sure whether I am right or not :)
Just wrong, I don’t believe I’ve ever met anyone from the LGBTQI community who thinks they are superior to anyone else.
You cannot say the same about you and your chosen religious lifestyle.
John, you are most certainly a bigot. Using your argument you could say that Nelson Mandela was a bigot as he had opinions of his own. Generally speaking, the religions disapprove of gay relationships. If that is your line of thinking you are as intolerant and bigoted as they are. This is 2013. Gay people deserve to have completely equal status. If you disagree I can’t see how you can claim not to be homophobic.
Aligning yourself with Widdecombe is sad.
I would say dont bring Nelson Madela into this story, but he was with us when we requested that equal rights and protecting be extended to include LGBT people in the South African constitution. I respect the man because when he was released he told everyone in South Africa to get back to work to make the country stong. I returned to the UK almost two years ago after 47 years in South Africa. NNadiba would be very happy to support us in our fight for equal rights.
“I am not prejudiced toward or intolerant of gay folk, but I do have a carefully thought through position”
Fine, JohnB – everyone’s entitled to their opinion. But would you really march in the streets just so that I and other LGBT people couldn’t get married? I’d never march in the streets to ban your church, even though I don’t share your beliefs.
What harm would equal marriage do you? You could still believe it to be wrong. What about all the atheists and divorcees (aka adulterers) who get married aginst your beliefs? Would you march in the streets to protest about that? I think not. And would you be happy if people had marched in the streets to try to stop YOUR marriage? (and you know they could use the bible to ‘justify’ that).
Your church won’t have to marry same sex couples if it chooses not to, so why think of protesting?
point taken re. the marching – the answer is no I wouldn’t march – it seems so negative – but I would uphold the right for people to do so in a democracy. I have told friends who might be inclined to do something of that ilk they would be better engaged doing acts of kindness and making their arguments respectfully and by engaging in the democratic process.
It looks as if same sex marriage will soon be legalised and those of us who feel it is not a good thing need to come to terms with it – but always remember where I and people I connect to as far as Christian beliefs goes come from – to love our neighbour as ourselves is the great command and believe and act according to the will of God is our priority. Sometimes that gives rise to conflict but we can not do anything other.
Take care Iris – however much we disagree, I have a high regard for you.
I was just thinking about your atheist and adulterer comment. I am not sure why you bracket these. According to traditional judaeo-christian belief, anyone can get married providing they are of opposite gender and do so on the understanding it is a life time commitment. Whether or not the couple believe in God is neither here nor there.
I agree the church has sometimes gone soft on allowing divorcees to marry. That was never God’s intention although I can see there may be exceptions. The fact it is rife in our culture and without wanting to be uncharitable, it often does mean it happens without any apparent opposition – just as may one day happen with gay marriage.
But as a Christian and one who preaches, I do need to seek to live by God’s righteous standards and preach the same. As for Christians condemning on sins they are against e.g. homosexuality and ignoring those like not helping the poor – I agree this happens and shouldn’t.
… You skirt round the question we all want an answer to. In what way will Equal Civil Marriage impact your sorry life and in what way do you think it is wrong and PLEASE don’t say because it says so in some old “holy book”; it so doesn’t but if you think it does then post the (irrelevant) verse or section….
JohnB, I wasn’t bracketing atheists and adulterers together – or rather, I *was* linking them only in the sense that they’re both examples of people who’d probably get married in a registry office, having been ‘rejected’ by their local Christian church.
I’m very relieved you probbaly wouldn’t march. :) To me, it seems a petty thing to do, to march to deprive others of rights that don’t impinge on one’s own rights. And, yes, I completely agree with you that there are much better things that Christians could do with the time and energy. For that reason, I really find it hard to understand why Christians are so worked up about equal marriage.
Yes, in their opinion, it breaches what the bible says (I don’t agree with that interpretation), but so does so much we do – eg working on the Sabbath, eating prawns, marrying when not a virgin, wearing clothes of mixed fibres, etc etc. I honestly think some people are far too obsessed with brooding on what other people may or may not do in bed.
When I think of all the bad things in the world today, the idea that two people getting married can cause so much fuss seems ridiculous. (general comments there – not aimed at you).
Ah, now it was “God’s righteous standards” that helped make me an agnostic :D Check out the OT and see how god orders the slaughter of men, women and children, and even permits/encourages rape. I found that unbelievable, and, more importantly, a sign that the bible wasn’t god’s word, but very much the words of men of that time.
But – that’s another argument :D Thank you for your good wishes. You’re by far the most pleasant traditional Christian that posts here, and I’m always pleased that you’re open to discussion and think about things honestly and genuinely. Enjoy your weekend :)
Paddyswurds: the tone of your response suggests to me you are provoking to fight rather than engaging in debate – I could bother to respond but won’t.
Iris: thank you for making the points you do. I appreciate it. I see there are things we agree and things we don’t. I would like to think there is a lot of common ground including a desire for a fair and just society.
If you being that choosing a religious lifestyle is superior to any human meaning others get treated like second class citizen like Witch Widdecome believes then yeah it does make you a homophobic bigots.
There are No legitimate arguments why two adults, committed to each other cannot make a chose to marry. Love is the same regardless of gender or orientation. It’s not all about children, though even then gay couples can have that choice too. And those children are wanted.
The reason why governments keep on producing legislation which impacts heavily on Christians is because they do not think we matter very much.” This statement is so incorrect. The reason they are supporting legislation is because they are working towards equality for all, which is the true Christian thing to do. God loves everyone! Why can’t you!d
The concept of marriage predates Christianity and the other two forms of Abrahamic religions, Judaism and Islam which share a common origin and common values. Marriage is very ancient dating back beyond recorded history and was practiced by all people of many cultures, ethnicities and belief systems on all continents.
The prevalace of the concept of marriage came to the forefront of culture when humankind evolved from hunter gatherer to agriculture and pastoralism which occured during the neolithic/agricultural revolution about 10,000 years ago.
Originally “marriage” was a private, binding contract between clans (families) to form an alliance, thereby increasing the clan’s chances for survival in war against rival clans. A “dowry” was given by each clan to “seal the deal”. Marriage was contractual, considered a passing of “property” between clans as a symbol of intention to honor the agreement being made. Property took many forms: cattle, land, children, whatever was considered to
Evil old bag
Using jesus to justify her hate and bigotry. Pathetic. If he were alive, which he isn’t, ’cause he was killed 2000 fecking years ago, he’d be ashamed she was a follower of his.
Sorry to tell you Mark, there is no evidence that the said Jesus ever existed. Neither Jewish or Roman records have one word that such a person ever existed, so to say “he” was killed 2000 years ago is to say the least, fanciful.
There aren’t any marches against marriage equality because freedom of religion isn’t being challenged. The legislation would, in reality, increase freedom of religion by allowing religious denominations who wish to perform same-sex marriages the freedom to do so, without compelling others to do the same.
A Christian conviction does not itself preclude an acceptance of homosexuality, especially given the modern understanding of its innateness, or restrict a belief that that civil marriage should be extended to same-sex couples. Indeed, the personal choice to believe in God, or any equivalent, cannot legitimately take precedence over biological reality: if sexual orientation is present from birth then, in both the religious context, where it God given, or from the secular perspective, it should maintain a pre-eminent position.
The reason they can’t get a street protest togeather is they is all to old and would not be able to walk .
Ignore her, she has always hated LGB&T people voted against every diversity piece of legislation that I know
What is Ann Widdicombe’s sexual identity?
She is clearly not heterosexual, she claims to be a virgin and so has never had a full sexual relationship with a man so I suppose she must be asexual.
She doesn’t appear to have a horse in this race at all so why doesn’t she shut her ignorant gob and mind her own asexual business?
Ann Widdecombe is a virgin for one reason and one reason only and that is that no man or indeed woman could ever stomach the idea of bedding her… the very idea is nauseating. yeukkk
She’s saving her virginity for Jesus…
Well that’s her excuse and she’s sticking to it!
Probably gay herself. She should grow up. Hideous!
As I have very dear gay women as friends, that thought is too horrible to contemplate. What a truly ghastly idea – banish it forthwith!
: “Over 200,000 people marched on the streets of London when Labour wanted to bring in the fox hunting ban – how come there wasn’t that kind of reaction speaking out for our religious freedom?“
How’s your freedom being infringed upon? Is anyone preventing you from marrying? No. Is anyone forcing you to end your marriage? No.
How does someone elses marriage infringe YOUR rights, Ann?
The reason why governments keep on producing legislation which impacts heavily on Christians is because they do not think we matter very much.”
Simple answer there, you ‘don’t matter very much, at least your religious opinion doesn’t. Any more so than anyone elses. And in nation of 65 million, that means your opinions on the human rights of others, is insignificant.
Sorry, but it’s the truth.
Your superstitious beliefs have no sway on the basic human rights of others.
Dare I say it, I have a sneaking fondness for acerbic, grumpy old biddies like Widdecombe. When they’re not horrifically destructive – ie in positions of power – they can be amusing in their way.
However, in saying that I’m also aware of the great dangers of seeing people like her as amusing but harmless. Too many people, I suspect, take her seriously, which is very, very misguided.
This old fatty is always around gay men how strange a fag hag is so against gay rights
This is exactly why I’m not religious. Religion is supposed to spread love…But from what I’ve seen…All it spreads is ignorance and hatred.
Retire woman retire!
I wish they would…
Preferably when it’s raining…
Oh Anne, people are not marching because, gay marriage isn’t an inhuman bloodsport, you silly silly woman !
She should read her bible a bit more carefully, especially about the role of the female of the species.
Oh God forgive me I can’t stop laughing. I’ve got tears of laughter running down my face – disgusted with myself! I only looked this posting up to see what you all thought. As a woman priest who suffered from her railings I must still have a lot of resentment in me. I support LGBT causes and you really should appreciate this old biddy because she is so awful it can only be of help to your cause especially now her main man seems to be in a spot of bother. After she railed about us at a late 80′s Diocesan Synod we gained enough supporters to swing the diocesan vote! She’s a brilliant asset to the LGTB cause. She can march on in bigotry to her hearts content because it needs to be recognised for what it is – disgusting homophobia and not the slightest bit remotely Christian.
200,000 people protested against fox hunting because the ban had a direct affect on how they live their lives. Equal marriage will affect NOBODY but GLBT people who wish to marry.
Someone should point out to Ann that the reason there were not 100’000 people marching in the streets against gay marraige is because – guess what – she represents a very small minority. Perhaps her voice would better serve if she explained why Cardinal O’Brien just resigned, and what it means for the election of the next pope
Simply another case of self-hatred, I’m afraid. This spinster-lady left the C of E and joined the catholics because they allowed the ordination WOMEN priests. How’s THAT for hypocricy when she’s enjoyed a lovely life and pension as a female MP? So much for equal rights ….
This is great. It is another show from christians, just how unchristian they can be. They pope and the Cardinal are both out of office because of their stance on equality, time this silly witch was out of office too. All these gay hate people seem to have something to hide, I wonder if this witch does not have another little woman on the side?
Oh shut up you bag!!!
Sorry that’s all I could manage at 12:45am