Comments on: Gay hate preacher's BBC blasphemy case

By: Roberto

Roberto — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 01:00:00 +0000

Great to see this homophobic turd get a good slap around the chops by the judiciary! Keep them coming boys!

By: Robert, ex-pat Brit

Robert, ex-pat Brit — Thu, 22 Nov 2007 18:21:00 +0000

Alan, that would be a wonderful thing. We would then be a truly secular society. First task would be to abolish the House of Lords, anachronistic and damn well undemocratic since nobody votes for them to put them in power. Hereditary positions in parliament are not about democracy at all. They need to go, for good.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Alan Dawe

Alan Dawe — Thu, 22 Nov 2007 17:31:00 +0000

This article refers to "the constitution of the nation which is built on the Christian faith."Today's UK is a multi-faceted society which should not have it's (unwritten) constitution based on any particular religious cult. It's time to disestablish the Church of England and have a non partisan Head of State who represents all of us.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: apYrs

apYrs — Thu, 22 Nov 2007 16:45:00 +0000

we really shouldn't allow these people there self-assigned titles. "Reverend", "your grace" etc are no more than adopted titles to make these people seem more important than the rest of us.By their reasoning I can call myself the the "grand punjandrum" and they'd have to give me due courtesy

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Andy Armitage

Andy Armitage — Thu, 22 Nov 2007 16:28:00 +0000

Since when was Green a reverend? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I've never seen him described as a preacher before. Has he taken holy orders? I know he used to be chair (I think it was chair) of the Tories' christian group, till they got embarrassed by him. Incidentally, try for a blogger who's keeping a wary eye on CV.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Rob Neal

Rob Neal — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 20:27:00 +0000

Hmm.. tricky precedent.We have strong anti-blasphemy laws, as well as ones protecting people from being persecuted for their race, religion or sexual persuasion. However we all feel we live in a democratic society that allows free speech, so which comes first?In USA, Fred Phelps and his "God hates fags" group is freely allowed to preach their beliefs under the first amendment. One cannot have their cake and eat it. Either put up with the bigots, or stop saying anyone saying anything. Where does one draw a line in the sand, and more to the point, who decides what is, and isn't acceptable?Oh, and by the way, the catholic church has forbidden anyone to read Harry Potter as it condones witchcraft, and now we find Dumbledore is a fag, that's only supported their opinions that J.K Rowling should be nailed to a cross ;o)

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Gary

Gary — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 17:34:00 +0000

How can the law of the land get involved in something like this? It isn't as if the opera was critasising a real person! What next? Having the police knocking on your door cuz you think Harry Potter is crap!!!!

(Report comment to the moderator)