allah is gay
Civil Liberties

LGBT Pride London: police attempt to remove ‘Allah is Gay’ placards for causing offence

“Pride is full of placards saying ‘God is Gay’, ‘Jesus had two fathers’, as well as those mocking the church and priests and pope,” writes Maryam Namazie, spokeswoman for the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain, “Yet CEMB members hold signs saying ‘Allah is Gay’ – as we did – and the police converge to attempt to remove them for causing ‘offence’.”

And now the East London Mosque has filed an official complaint with the organisers of ‘Pride in London‘ (what happened to the ‘Gay’ prefix? Isn’t that kind of important?) alleging ‘Islamophobia’. The mosque’s spokesman Salman Farsi told the Evening Standard: “We’ve raised a complaint with the co-chairs of the event that the group was inciting hatred against Muslims, and in particular [in relation] to our good name, based on absolutely groundless reasons.”

“Our track record for challenging homophobia in East London is quite well known.” he added.

Except, according to Peter Tatchell, that isn’t quite true (or, if you prefer, it’s a lie): “East London Mosque has refused all dialogue with LGBT community,” he tweeted. “It refuses to meet LGBT Muslims. I have asked them 11 times since 2015.”

Oxfam seems to agree: they cancelled an event at the East London Mosque a few years ago after learning that a headline speaker, Ibrahim Hewitt, had declared gay people should be “severely punished” under Islamic law, which some might think sounds slightly Islamophobic.

So somebody is telling porkies.*

‘Pride in London’ (may one no longer have pride in London without… O, never mind) has made it known that they will not tolerate this kind of thing: “If anyone taking part in our parade makes someone feel ostracised, discriminated against or humiliated, then they are undermining and breaking the very principles on which we exist. Our code of conduct is very clear on this matter,” a Pride spokesperson said. “All volunteers, staff and parade groups agree that Pride celebrates diversity and will not tolerate any discrimination of any kind. While our parade has always been a home to protest, which often means conflicting points of view, Pride must always be a movement of acceptance, diversity and unity. We will not tolerate Islamophobia,” s/he added, rather emphatically.

The mosque’s complaint has been referred to the ‘Pride in London’ community advisory board, who are tasked with deciding whether the CEMB will be allowed to participate in future Pride marches. That is to say that ‘Pride in London’ will make a theological determination about whether placards declaring such things as ‘Allah is Gay’ or ‘F**k Islamic Homophobia’ (not, please note, ‘F**k Islam’, as Lucy Masoud of the Fire Brigades Union deceitfully alleged) are, in fact, Islamophobic. This will be a rather important judgment and one which will be worth following, for if the CEMB are banned from marching in next year’s Pride for making people feel “ostracised, discriminated against or humiliated”, then Christians might justifiably object to Christophobic placards or those which mock the Church or insult the Pope. Indeed, anyone anywhere may object to a placard displaying the word ‘F**k’ on the grounds of offence against public decency (for why should young children be barred from participation because of the display of such foul language?)

Perhaps the Bishop of Liverpool might advise on this complex matter of mutually-exclusive freedoms. The Rt Rev’d Paul Bayes has just become a patron of his city’s Pride Festival, which he will doubtless use to highlight the sins of promiscuity and infidelity within the LGBT community while lauding the virtues of fidelity, monogamy and holiness in sexual behaviour, as the Church of England believes and teaches. It is wonderful that a bishop has been honoured with such a prominent pulpit at this sensitive time, in order that he might challenge prejudice and confront discrimination head-on.

But if ‘Allah is Gay’ placards were to appear in Liverpool Pride, whose side would the Bishop take? That of the police who seek to censor them (uniquely) for their intrinsic Islamophobia and causing great offence to local Muslims? Or that of gay (ex-)Muslims who seek to highlight the homophobia in their religion, and the appalling suffering and persecution of LGBT Muslims across the Islamic world(s)? How might he advise the Liverpool Pride community advisory board if they were faced with the same theo-political decision as ‘Pride in London’? What are the limits of discrimination and diversity? Which expressions of diversity must be excluded in order to secure a ‘safe space’ or foster unity? If the Bishop believes in “tackling prejudice and promoting awareness of the richness of our LGBTI+ community”, why should the CEMB be denied the free expression of their colourful and important voice within that community?

If a placard declaring ‘Jesus is a Fag‘ is permissible, why not one which declares ‘Allah is Gay’? Indeed, why not one which says ‘Mohammed is Gay’ or ‘The Prophet is a Puff’?**

Or are we simply to accept the defamation of Jesus and the Church in the name of tolerance and acceptance, but prohibit the defamation of Allah or Mohammed because of a de facto (if not de jure) sharia blasphemy code being zealously implemented by the police?

In the hierarchy of competing rights a battle is being waged for supremacy. With the Church neutered in the never-ending pursuit of a happy via media of mutual flourishing and good disagreement, the apparently irreconcilable polarities are occupied by certain advocates of Islam (mediated by the MCB) and certain advocates of LGBT equality (mediated by Pride). It is difficult to see a successful via media compromise emerging between the two: one either permits ‘Allah is Gay’ placards, or one censors them.

Perhaps it’s time for the emergence of a Queer Prophetology, something akin to the debates surrounding the Queer Christology of embodied friendship and the divine celebration of incarnational diversity, for, as the eternal archetypal Muslim, surely Mohammed was the embodiment of all human variation and behavioural modulation?

Or is ‘Pride in London’ about to make the theological determination that Allah is not, never has been and never will be gay, and that to declare so is undoubtedly offensive (ie blasphemous) to orthodox Muslims?

No doubt, then, the CEMB will be barred from future Pride marches “on ‘Health & Safety’ grounds”.

And no doubt the Bishop of Liverpool will remain silent.

 

*For the sake of clarity, ‘Porkies’ is vernacular English rhyming slang: ‘porky pies’ rhymes with ‘lies’. It is not used here with the intention of causing gratuitous offence to any Muslims, such as, for example, might the hanging rashers of bacon over the door handles of a mosque.
**This blog post may not be interpreted as any kind of incitement to create and display such a placard, for your own safety’s sake (and the sake of the Archbishop Cranmer blog).

  • IanCad

    Dammit YG !!! This blog is going to be the cause of me taking up drinking. AAaaargh…!!!

    • Anton

      Take a little wine for the sake of your stomach.

      • David

        Always a good one that for Christian gatherings.

      • Watchman

        It has been pointed out by the more pedantically puritanical that the Greek for wine does not differentiate between fermented and unfermented grape juice.

        Proverbs 21:17
        The one who loves pleasure will become a poor man; whoever loves wine and oil will not get rich.

        • Anton

          Indeed. This was pointed out to me by a temperance Christian, and it caused me to rewrite my short essay on why Christians are free drink alcohol, to take it into account. Samuele Bacchiocchi’s book on the subject is as bad as his book on the Sabbath is good.

          Jesus’ eating and drinking with his friends is mentioned in Matthew 11:19 and was used by his enemies to smear him, falsely, as a man who took it to excess – a glutton and a drunkard. This means that alcoholic drink was involved, that Jesus drank it, and that he approved of it (in moderation) for his disciples.

          In the New Testament there is no blanket prohibition on drinking alcohol, by Jesus or anybody else. Jesus preached freely against sinful things, but he never preached against alcohol. The subject is not ignored in the New Testament, for drunkenness is again condemned (eg, Romans 13:13). Teetotalitarian Christians must explain why, if Christianity is a dry religion, Jesus and the New Testament writers did not say so. Also, grape juice is not a plausible translation of ‘oinos’ in John 2; who is going to be impressed at a wedding in a non-dry culture by turning water into grape juice after the booze had run out?

          If alcohol were forbidden to Christians then it is inconceivable that the church’s principal sacrament would be based on a drink whose description in scripture likely involves (and certainly does not exclude) alcohol.

          God gave drink because it gladdens the heart (Psalm 104:15). I have heard people call for a drink of water, or say that a glass of wine would be nice, but I have never heard anybody call for non-alcoholic grape juice in order to gladden their heart. Other positive references to alcoholic drink include Ecclesiastes 9:7 and the Song of Songs 7:9. The book of Proverbs has several references to drink, some positive (9:2,5), some negative (20:1, 23:21,30-33). The positive references indicate that alcohol is a good thing; the others show that excess, which leads to drunkenness in the short term and degradation in the long term, is bad.

          Christians should abstain from alcohol wherever it is illegal; if they are liable to drink so much that they behave indecorously; if it does not become an idol; and if they are likely to cause specific others to stumble. Otherwise, cheers!

          • Watchman

            Looks as though you put some work into that, Anton. I agree with you. If we think back to the history of drinking in this country the reputation of anything alcoholic was rather besmirched by the revelries of the working man in indulging to excess. Indeed, I remember when pubs shut at 10pm and they were not places which welcome ladies, or even women. Sidney and Beatrice Webb, full of zealous liberal repression believed that the working man with a hangover would probably not perform well at work, even if he got there, so they saw to it that they protected the dear souls, as liberals do, by restricting their drinking time. I think it was partly this attitude that got alcohol a bad reputation. Certainly, I grew up with an attitude that strong drink of any kind was taboo. The only pub in the village had sawdust on the floor and spittoons available for those in need and were not places for those of a delicate disposition. Like the theatre and the cinema the public house was not approved of in the gospel hall. The story of Noah was used as an example of the evils of drink. We were all victims of this culture and some of that still pervades.

            We forget that beer was at least safe to drink when water wasn’t.

            What limits our intake now is, of course, the government’s largesse in following the Webb’s example and protecting our health by excessively taxing us on whatever our tipple is. Isn’t it good of them. Cheers.

          • Anton

            Yes, pubs have come a long way in one lifetime, from the era in which they were dark smoky places where strong men smelling of sweat after a hard day’s work went to drink. There has always been a riotous element to the drinking of alcohol in northern Europe, whereas Mediterranean peoples drink in moderation publicly and those who get drunk (as they did – check the cirrhosis rates) did so at home.

            There was an argument for enduring abstention in order to set an example during the Industrial Revolution and its burgeoning slums, but the cultural argument got tangled with the eternal one by the teetotalists – especially in the USA where prohibition meant that the alcohol trade was taken over by gangsters who recycled the money into crime rather than into legitimate interests. Only now has US beer come good again, with microbrew.

            Governments will tax anything, of course – we lost the USA because of a tax on tea!

          • Watchman

            It’s interesting to note that the Salvation Army do not do communion because they don’t want to encourage the taking of strong drink. I wonder if it never occurred to General Booth that they could celebrate the Lords Supper by doing as some churches do and serve grape juice. My guess is that grape juice wasn’t readily available because it underwent a natural fermentation.

          • Anton

            Yes, historically there was no clear line between grape juice and alcoholic wine, or water and small beer, and the temperance crew forget that.

            I added a paragraph about the Webbs, by the way. They were among Stalin’s stooges in the 1930s.

          • Watchman

            Thanks for the addition. I didn’t know that. I simply saw them as in the true lab/lib tradition of attempting to control behaviour by pretending it was all for the good of the people (like most wives do to their husbands) Social scientists see them as heroic figures when, in fact, they seemed to be a couple of unscrupulous opportunists.

            Small beer must have saved many a life, being the only safe thing to drink when cholera and typhoid were rife, particularly after urbanisation started and this was possibly true of wine in our Lord’s day. You should try to include that in a sermon!

  • DP111

    Huge fissures are opening in Britain. Its not just race , but something far more volatile. The potential for civil war is beginning to look a real possibility. Each community, particularly Muslims and LGBT, views they are right, and the other will have to submit. The police will be in the middle. I dont think they can cope.

    • dannybhoy

      The police will obey their political leaders until their own safety and that of their families are threatened.
      Definition of a politician:
      A man or woman willing to lay down your life for his country..

      • Martin

        Of course the police won’t even go into the water to rescue a drowning man these days.

        • Sarky

          No, but they’ll run towards terrorists and get horrifically injured to protect the public.
          You really are a prat.

          • Martin

            Sarky

            Mostly they shoot them from a distance.

            Probably the time has come to allow the public to arm themselves. After all, a lot of people can get injured in the eight minutes it takes for the police to arrive.

          • Sarky

            Yeah great idea. All those ‘responsible’ citizens with guns.

            As for ‘mostly they shoot them from a distance’, tell that to the officer murdered at westminster or the officer who took on three with just a baton. Like i said, prat.

          • Martin

            Sarky

            You think the police officers who shot de Menezes and tried to cover it up were responsible? And why shouldn’t citizens be as responsible as the police who we never see on the streets?

          • Sarky

            Do you ever think before you post?

          • Martin

            Sarky

            Frequently, you should try it some time.

          • Sarky

            You should also try to come up with something a bit more original.

          • Martin

            Sarky

            Seeing you never come up with anything original I fail to see why I should.

          • Anton

            A member of SO19 or whatever it’s called nowadays thinks it’s a good idea: he says so in his book (The Good Guys Wear Black by Steve Collins).

            The Met’s armed response squad actually train the SAS in this aspect of combat, because SO19 are in armed sieges daily and the SAS probably twice in a lifetime.

            What do you think of these police who ran away from a man with a hammer leaving their female colleague to face the attack?

          • Sarky

            Pathetic. However, over reliance on the tazer means that when it doesnt work they dont know what to do.

            With regards to your first point, do we want to end up like the states, where more people are killed by guncrime than have ever been killed by terrorists?

          • Anton

            The gun freedoms in the USA are there as a keep-power-dispersed sanction against over-mighty government, and the time will come when you wish we had that freedom.

          • Can’t go with you here Anton. The right to own a gun contributes significantly to the number of murders in the States. But even if I had the right to own a gun, surely for a Christian, turning it on constituted government would be the last reason to own one; we are to submit to government, even bad government, not overthrow it.

        • Pubcrawler

          This is basic good practice: I learnt when I was a Cub Scout that diving into unknown water was reckless, it’s always better to stay on dry land as far as possible. As a St John Ambulance first aid trainer put it: you’re no use to anyone dead.

          • Anton

            If nobody is drowning then certainly it’s a bad idea to go into risky water, but if someone IS drowning then do you risk your life to save theirs or leave them to die; and what are the police for?

          • Martin

            PC

            Actually police officers frequently did rescue people, part of their training was in lifesaving. Mind you, in those days it wouldn’t have been ‘unknown water’ it would have been on their beat and well known. Now it seems that their training is mostly in threat assessment.

        • jsampson45

          See RNLI advice on rescuing people from drowning.

          • Martin

            At one time the police were specifically trained, now they just stand on the bank and watch people drown.

    • bluedog

      A quick scan of the internet will take you to youtube clips showing Germans preparing for civil war and arming themselves in anyway they can. Not sure of the extent to which this is just political posturing, but it does reflect a very profound insecurity that the current German elites have caused through their migration policies. Inevitably, it will be a different leadership that cleans up the mess. The same situation may pertain elsewhere. Usually one has the greatest respect for Lord Tebbit’s judgement, but his recent suggestion of Sajid Javid as a replacement for Mrs May was chilling. Muslims as both PM and Mayor of London? That might cause a reaction within the deep state, inclusion only goes so far.

  • Anton

    When a cat fight starts in Satan’s realm, Christians should keep clear. We should pray, of course – simply that God’s will be done.

  • if ‘Allah is Gay’ placards were to appear in Liverpool Pride, whose side would the Bishop take?

    When Mark Thompson was the BBC Director-General, he freely admitted that Islam received special treatment because of the threat of violence: ‘Without question, “I complain in the strongest possible terms” is different from “I complain in the strongest possible terms and I am loading my AK47 as I write”.’

    I imagine the Bishop of Liverpool would also understand the need to respond positively to the demands of the Muslim community. That isn’t to single out the bishop for cowardice in the face of an attack on free speech; confronted with the real possibility of violence, who wouldn’t take the easy way out? Certainly not the police.

    • Mark

      The BBC are the worst for this (as are Channel 4).

      After gymnast Louis Smith and mates did some larking about pretending to be Aladdin and then doing an Islamic prayer position on a mat, Smith received death threats. But he had to appear on Loose Women, where he was trashed and called a racist and xenophobe.
      On BBC 5 Live, Emma Barnett (now of Sunday Morning Live) asked him, “Was that Islamophobic”?
      He replied “I don’t know what that word means” (good on him for saying that).
      She replied, (among a few other things), “Well it’s mickey-taking”.
      Mickey-taking?????

      I had always wondered if the BBC had ever defined “Islamophobia” because they chuck it around so much, but it seems they have, and part of the definition is joking around.

      Help!

  • Coniston
    • Anton

      That is a shockingly inadequate article. Morally speaking it is quite right, of course, but the author seems totally unaware that radical student power took over many US (and French and British) campuses in the 1960s in exactly the same way as described. The idea that this is an unprecedented phenomenon is staggeringly ignorant.

      • Merchantman

        Yes and Armed occupation by the Black Power movement on the coat tails of radical students.

      • Coniston

        I think it is far more serious this time (I remember the 1960s – the situation in France was much worse than here). The comparison is with the Cultural Revolution in China and the role of the Revolutionary Red Guards.
        ‘Students were at the forefront of Mao’s Cultural Revolution. They were officially empowered to denounce tutors who refused to follow official speech codes; to punish any criticism of the regime; to undermine teachers who refused to fall into line; and to shame dissenters. These students were intolerant of established authority and elitist intellectual ideas. It was an anarchic era based on ‘thought-reform’, enforced by public humiliation, mental and physical intimidation, and self-criticism aimed at ensuring conformity.’
        If we have a Corbyn government in the near future – or even before then – we might well move much closer to the situation in 1960s China.

        • Anton

          I think that even if Corbyn came to power we are quite a long way from the madness of China’s Cultural Revolution. I also believe, in all courtesy, that you underestimate the magnitude of what happened on US campuses in the 1960s.

          • Coniston

            I trust you are right. But we seem to be moving into an increasingly febrile situation, into unknown territory – in this country and in the West generally.

  • “Perhaps it’s time for the emergence of a Queer Prophetology …. for, as the eternal archetypical Muslim, surely Mohammed was the embodiment of all human variation and behavioural modulation?”

    Yes, perhaps Mohammed’s apparent sexual interest in young girls was really a pathological displacement of his repressed desire for sex with men and boys? Or, then again, perhaps not.

    • The Snail

      Perhaps because males an females are born in roughly equal proportions – polygamy in Islam deprives many men of a wife! If one man marries 4 women then 3 men are deprived of a wife. Who knows what that might lead to . At least the suicide bombers will get their 72 virgins if they have no wife in the here and now.

  • Dreadnaught

    So It’s OK to allow a publication and an ideology to exist that freely endorses hurling homosexuals off tall buildings and finish them of with a light stoning but it’s a chargeable offence to parade with a slogan saying a mythical entity is a homosexual.
    The world has gone mad.

    • Mark

      I think you’re wrong about the throwing gays off high buildings. If they are still alive on the ground, it’s not a “light stoning”, but a bloody big, murderously fervent one in most interpretations…….

      • Dreadnaught

        Sarcasm Mark.. sarcasm.

    • dannybhoy

      Is going mad. Western civilisation has run its course and is on its way down the pan. Once any civilisation loses faith in the values that shaped it, that civilisation is destined fro the scrapheap of history..

    • petej

      The bible also commands the execution of men who have sex with men. Not all Christians promote the death sentence for gay people. Not all Muslims do either.

      • The Snail

        But Christians assess the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) by the life and teaching of Jesus. After all he said several times “You have heard it said in old times…. but I say to you” That is he moved the discussion forward, just as the Old Testament does. Most of the Law of the Old testament is diregarded by Christians – wearing mixed fabrics, all the ceremonials and sacrificial system, Levirate Marriage, the interpretation of the Sodom & Gomorrah incident etc.

        • petej

          Im sure most British Muslims would also apply reason to interpreting their own texts.

          • Except the Koran is not open to “reason” or interpretation. It was (allegedly) dictated by God (who cannot be fathomed and acts irrationally if He chooses) and is thus not open to hermeneutics.

          • Anton

            You must believe that the Catholic Catechism is in the same category then.

          • The Catechism was not dictated and it is the very epitome of prayerful reason applied to revelation in scripture, guided by the Holy Spirit.

          • Anton

            Which is not the point I was making. You Catholics bang on about different illegitimate interpretations of the Bible, yet the Bible is just a sequence of words like the Quran and the Catechism, and the meaning of words and their strings can be contended.

          • The Snail

            And the Koran is supposedly a perfect copy of the original which has existed for all eternity in paradise. It is therefore unchangeable and without error. Where the Koran is self-contradictory it is the later revelation to Mohammed that abrogates(overrides) the former. The ‘chapters’ in the Koran are labelled Medina or Mecca depending where tradition has it they were ‘received’. The Medinan chapters abrogate the Meccan Chapters. Unfortunately the most violent chapters and their violence to non-Muslims come from the Medinan chapters. That is, I am afraid, the reasonable way Islamic logic works.

          • petej

            Well I’ve come across a lot of convoluted Christian logic as well. I think we need to be careful not to be hypocritical when addressing other faiths and also not fall into the the trap of telling people what they believe.

          • The Snail

            No I get my information from reliable Muslim contemporary sources and ex Muslims (e.g. Seeking Allah Finding Jesus by Nabeel Qreshi) and Muslim websites. These views are endorsed by the Al-Azhar University in Cairo – the ‘Oxford’ of the Islamic world. They are not just the views of a few nutters.

            Please see:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabeel_Qureshi_(author)

          • petej

            Well I work with a few British Muslims and they’ve never expressed a desire to murder me.

          • Anna

            To be true to the one’s faith whether Christianity or Islam, it is necessary to interpret scriptures literally. If applying ‘reason’ leads you to reject what the scriptures command, then by your actions you are declaring that the scriptures are irrational, invalid and lack any authority to guide your life, in which case you might as well either leave the faith or call yourself a cultural Christian or Muslim (similar to those Jews who call themselves ‘cultural’ Jews).

            All true Christians hold the scriptures to be valid. So, we believe the punishments set out for various transgressions such as blasphemy were valid for Israel during the Old Covenant period (which has now passed), but not under the New Covenant. This is the period of grace, and Christianity is not about running governments, but saving souls – and saved souls will then regulate their lives according to scriptural teachings.

          • petej

            I don’t see why you can say that bits of the OT are no longer valid, but you won’t accept that British Muslims might feel similarly about their religious text. Isn’t that hypocrisy?

          • Anna

            This is not something I came up with- there is a strong scriptural basis for separation of the two covenants. The apostles were clear in their teachings that we are under the new covenant and the Law no longer applies to us. Unlike in the OT times, when there was a theocracy, Jesus clearly stated that His kingdom is not of this world. So there is no ‘Christian government’ under the NT, and any attempt to set up such a government (as by the RCC in past centuries) is unscriptural. However, in a predominantly Christian society, laws and institutions have often been influenced by Christian values.

            Islamic societies, on the other hand, have always been governed by Sharia law, choosing to apply it in either an extremely harsh manner (Saudi Arabia and Iran) or a comparatively lenient fashion (Pakistan). Neither the Quran, Hadith nor tradition gives Muslims an option in this matter. As one Islamic commentator suggested, once Sharia law is established in a society, democracy will be rendered unnecessary because “God will be ruling”.

          • petej

            I understand that you haven’t just made up the decision to junk most of the OT laws, but, given that you do not believe all the laws in your holy text, I’m asking with what authority you can decide which bits of the Quran all/most British Muslims believe in.

            Someone has helpfully posted a survey which shows that 48% of British Muslims don’t believe homosexuality should be illegal and 79% don’t believe that the punishment for adultery should be execution (they weren’t asked if gay people should be executed)

            In other words, I can probably go to work in safety today.

          • Anna

            “…given that you do not believe all the laws in your holy text…”

            Kindly don’t put words in my mouth. I absolutely believe all those laws were from God. I also believe – based on scripture – that we live under a new covenant, where the purpose of the law was fulfilled.

            “I’m asking with what authority you can decide which bits of the Quran all/most British Muslims believe in…”

            I have no more authority than you do to decide what the Muslims should believe in. I am, however, sufficiently familiar with the Muslim culture having grown up in the ME, to know that the average Muslim will not defy their own scriptures, the Hadith, and the pronouncements of Muslim clerics, just because they happen to live in the West. Perhaps you believe that Muslims in Britain follow a special British Quran?

            “In other words, I can probably go to work in safety today…”

            Wonderful! Britain is not yet a Muslim majority nation. Are you gay? Then I would strongly advise you to conceal that fact when travelling to a Muslim nation.

          • petej

            The proportion of Christians who believe gay people should be executed is also much higher in the Middle East and parts of Africa. These beliefs are part religious, but they are cultural also.

            If 79% of British Muslims believe execution is not an appropriate punishment for adultery, then I think it is safe to say that the majority of British Muslims do not believe it is an appropriate punishment for being gay either.

            There is no special British Quran, but there is no special British bible either and lots of Christians believe gay people should be executed (indeed most British Christians believed that too not so long ago). People of a particular faith do not all think the same.

            I don’t mean to be rude, but I couldn’t be less interested in the culture war you are waging against Muslims. I am well aware that Islam has a problem with homophobia. I just don’t agree with you that it is appropriate to ascribe anti gay views to every Muslim in the UK…or even a majority of them.

          • Anna

            I have no interest in any culture wars, but our conclusions need to based on knowledge/experience. My only interest was to provide some insight into a culture and way of thinking, which, judging from your comments, you seem to have little knowledge/experience of. You seem to put so much faith into one survey – sadly, knowing Muslim societies as I do, I tend to be more sceptical.

          • petej

            No, it wasn’t my survey. Someone else posted it to me. But it does at least suggest that the majority of British Muslims have no desire to murder gay people?

          • Mark

            Ooh, I’d be careful with “cultural Jew”.

            A few years back, I suggested to a friend he was “cultural” and hit a nerve.
            I’d known him for thirty years. Comp school, no “religion”, bacon sarnies, atheistic outlook, married a non-Jewish mixed race atheist woman………but his kids at the time were getting trouble at school for being Jewish. During the conversation, I used the “only cultural” thing and got it in the neck! I was taken a bit by surprise after years of non-discussion of the subject at all. Still friends though.

          • Anna

            I used that term only because some Jews I know, including a PhD student from Israel, have used the same to explain their own identities

          • Pubcrawler

            Why are you sure?

      • Pubcrawler

        “Not all Muslims do either.”

        Hmmm. A recent survey would suggest that at least a sizeable majority do.

        https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/11/british-muslims-strong-sense-of-belonging-poll-homosexuality-sharia-law

        True, they weren’t asked if it should be a capital offence, but even so I humbly suggest removing the rose tint from your spectacles.

        Oh, and don’t bother trying a tu quoque.

        • petej

          79% thought adulterers should not be stoned.

          52% thought that homosexuality should not be legal.

          Which means at least 48% of British Muslims do not believe in the death sentence for gay people. So I am absolutely right to say that not all Muslims promote the death sentence for gay people.

          You have me wrong. I have no rose tint when it comes to Islam. I just don’t think making the situation sound worse than it actually is is very helpful.

          It would be interesting to give the same questions to evangelical Christians.

          • Jonathan

            “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.
            But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
            At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
            “No one, sir,” she said.
            “Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.””

      • Dreadnaught

        Its not about Muslims and Christians; its about ‘live’ Islamic directions, acted upon and intended to be acted upon in perpetuity where the Sharia is dominant such as Iran.

        • petej

          I thought we were talking about the UK?

          • Dreadnaught

            Islam is global.

          • petej

            So you would blame all Muslims for anything that any other Muslims did?

          • Dreadnaught

            Where have you read that I blamed Muslims? I specifically identify Islam as the problem but that does not register on your radar obviously. You seem to be incapable of disseminating what is written and your preconception that by criticising Islam one must be criticising 1.2 billion Muslims.

          • petej

            I’m sorry you’ve lost me and I’m not very interested anyway.

          • Dreadnaught

            Pretty obvious.

  • Mark

    I’d never believe a word the East London mosque says.
    Did they get upset about the “Islam will dominate the world” and “Freedom go to hell” (and much worse) placards of some years ago, held up by Muslims on the streets of London? Or for that matter, why didn’t the police remove them for “offence” or were they not so worried about the British public getting all violent as opposed to another group known for religious violence?

    Justin Trudeau declared “Happy Allah Pride Day” in a Canadian event, as it coincided with Eid. I think he was being all cuddly and inclusive, rather than ironic, but who knows?

    I’d imagine the “Jesus is gay” thing has not been complained about or anything. What would be the point?
    But the East London mosque (and many others) have a huge problem with apostates, and I suspect that might be more to the fore here.

  • Inspector General

    The Inspector will comment further when he stops rolling around in hysteria on reading Cranmer’s interpretation of the opportunity presented to the Bishop of Liverpool…

  • The group LGBT Against Islamophobia stands shoulder to shoulder with the East London Mosque:

    STATEMENT ABOUT ‘ALLAH IS GAY’ PLACARDS AT LONDON PRIDE

    LGBT+ Against Islamophobia offers our support to the East London Mosque in its protests against the ‘Allah is Gay’ placards at London Pride 2017. Our group was formed because we recognised that Muslims were being targeted and scapegoated in a way that LGBT+ people have been in the past here in the UK. We strongly object to our oppression being used to vilify another group, and we do not believe that Islam is any more homophobic than other organised religions.

    Dearie me. From the Islamic law book Reliance of the Traveller:

    p17.3 The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said:
    (1) ‘Kill the one who sodomizes and the one who lets it be done to him.’
    (2) ‘May Allah curse him who does what Lot’s people did.’
    (3) ‘Lesbianism by women is adultery between them.’

    How long can the LGBT brigade continue kidding themselves?

    • dannybhoy

      Why do you think they demonise Christianity?

      • @ dannybhoy—They believe that all people and all civilizations are equal. Ultimately, I suppose it goes back to Boasian anthropology, which argues that any differences between people and civilizations are purely environmental, with no part played by race and genes. Boasian anthropology has been, and continues to be, of immense value in justifying Third World immigration.

        • dannybhoy

          Never heard of it until today. Not sure that explains why it is Christianity that gets maligned rather than Islam though?

          • Mark

            On the specific thing about homosexuality in those two religions, it is easy for certain types to have a go at Christianity for a few things, without noticing there are gay vicars and steps forward. The “leave that Leviticus scripture behind” is also easy. If this was politicised into left and right, both can do that to an extent because it is there for analysis, challenge and criticism.

            When it comes to Islam, there are easily those who can apply that analysis, challenge and criticism on this subject, but they are often from the “right”.
            It seems to me that the further left some go, Islam simply becomes untouchable. Fingers in ears and hands over eyes, and not daring to go near any equivalent scripture, because this is a minority and a mainly ethnic one at that. Coupled with Islamists hating the past of Britain and the West, really helps the far left to snuggle up to them. So all criticism is out of bounds.

          • @ dannybhoy—Admitting that one religion is better than others would fatally undermine the creed of equality. Progressives shun objective truth as Count Dracula shuns daylight.

        • Anton

          Would you specify some social factors that you believe are genetically determined and outline the evidence for their genetic basis, please?

          • @ Anton—You could try Nicholas Wade’s A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History, reviewed here by Milo Yianniopoulos.

          • Anton

            All that the review firmly states is that you can tell what continent somebody is from according to their genome. Well I already know that black people suffer more from sickle cell anaemia because the gene for it confers protection against malaria and malaria is more common in Africa. But that is hardly a *social* difference.

            Nothing in that review names a specific social factor which is claimed to be genetically determined and also outlines the evidence that it is largely genetic based. It remains deeply contentious which social differences between men and women are genetic and which are cultural, let alone between different races.

          • @ Anton—My mistake. I assumed you were sufficiently interested in the subject to read the book. Sub-Saharan Africa has social factors by the bucketful which maintain its position as the least developed, and the least capable of developing, place on Earth, and sub-Saharan Africans are the only people without Neanderthal DNA. You will doubtless say that’s pure coincidence.

          • Anton

            Where did I say I wouldn’t read the book? But I am not able to order and read the book inside 30 minutes; was my mistake to assume that you understood it sufficiently to be able to outline the genetic evidence for social behaviour, as I asked? By that, I mean the identification of specific sets of genes which give rise to proteins that demonstrably govern specific behaviours, since correlation is not causation.

          • Cressida de Nova

            This is off topic but what do you think of Neil deGrasse Tyson? I listened to his reasons for the non existence of God and I was rendered speechless. He is not very bright…verging on the idiot category in fact. How do these people ever make any significant scientific discoveries?They must have good teams working for them who do all of the work.

          • Anton

            The problem is that because of the formidable amount of specialisation necessary to do research nowadays you can be a good scientist and have little clue about anything else – but because science is a high-status profession the media will take you seriously on many topics and seek out your views. Astrophysics is particularly prominent in this phenomenon, because of its search for physical origins. (Actually the Big Bang is spectacularly consistent with Genesis, because both say that there was a definite beginning – unlike some religions and the “steady state” scientific theory.) On top of that, the temptation to speak out on subjects you know nothing more about than Joe Average is irresistible, especially when you get paid for it. And the US media will love Tyson because of his race. (This is meant as an insult to the patronising media, not to Tyson.)

          • Cressida de Nova

            Thank you for this response.He should stick to Astrophysics.
            Yes I know the Big Bang is mentioned in the OT. I wish I could remember the exact reference. It is very clear.

            Pity that scientists do not have a broader education and experience. I think a link between metaphysics and science would achieve results better and quicker….but this is not the age for that since there seems to be a resistance to anything metaphysical. Einstein said imagination was more important than knowledge meaning that one really needs to incorporate both.

          • As the Catechism states:

            “The question about the origins of the world and of man has been the object of many scientific studies which have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man. These discoveries invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator, prompting us to give him thanks for all his works and for the understanding and wisdom he gives to scholars and researchers” (CCC 283).

            God created the universe from nothing for the good of intelligent creatures to come to know him.

            Did you know it was a Belgian priest and physicist, Georges LemaÎtre, who concluded that Einstein’s theory of general relativity would cause a static eternal universe to collapse into nothingness? Since Einstein’s theory was sound, this only meant one thing: The universe was growing, and had a beginning in the finite past.. Fr. LemaÎtre and Einstein discussed the cosmic consequences of this theory and although Einstein was sceptical at first, in 1933 he proclaimed that LemaÎtre’s theory of an expanding universe was one of the most “beautiful theories he had ever heard.”

            Fr. LemaÎtre called his theory “the primeval atom” but another physicist, Fred Hoyle, mocked the theory with the term “Big Bang”. Hoyle believed that theories of the universe beginning to exist from nothing were “primitive myths” designed to put religion into science.

          • Anton

            A pretty good summary, Jack! But can you justify your claim of Hoyle’s motivation in the last sentence? It is indeed plausible, but motivation cannot reliably be known unless he said so explicitly. Have you a reference, please, as you put “primitive myths” in quotation marks?

          • The theory was one alternative to the Big Bang which, like the Big Bang, agreed with key observations of the day, namely Hubble’s red shift observations, and Hoyle was a strong critic of the Big Bang. He coined the term “Big Bang” on BBC radio’s Third Programme broadcast on 28 March 1949. It was popularly reported by George Gamov and his opponents that Hoyle intended to be pejorative, and the script from which he read aloud was interpreted by his opponents to be “vain, one-sided, insulting, not worthy of the BBC”.[21] Hoyle explicitly denied that he was being insulting and said it was just a striking image meant to emphasize the difference between the two theories for the radio audience.[22] In another BBC interview he said “The reason why scientists like the “big bang” is because they are overshadowed by the Book of Genesis. It is deep within the psyche of most scientists to believe in the first page of Genesis”.[23]

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hoyle#Rejection_of_the_Big_Bang

          • Anton

            First, thank you for the reference to Hoyle saying “The reason why scientists like the “big bang” is because they are overshadowed by the Book of Genesis.” I knew he was atheist but I did not know he had said that. I never met him but we have mutual acquaintances in the scientific community and his autobiography is an entertaining bout of score-settling for those in the know. It finishes with a few pages about religion which are more notable for what they reject (omnipotent monotheism) than accept. He simply isn’t coherent on the subject – because (not that he’d agree) it is so much bigger than him.

          • This a rather interesting article on his shifting views. What do you do when you know there is a Creator and yet want to deny it?

            http://www.beliefnet.com/news/science-religion/2001/09/was-life-begun-by-chance-not-a-chance.aspx?

          • Anton

            Genesis 1:! is enough accord with the Big Bang for me! Remember that many pagans believed that the world had been eternal, and that before Einstein’s equations which gave the Big Bang solution science had no clue about the physical origin of the universe. Several thousand years after God told Moses that the universe had a beginning, man works out the details in his own strength.

            Your OT Big Bang reference will be one of the ones mentioned in this:

            http://www.reasons.org/articles/big-bang—the-bible-taught-it-first

    • Inspector General

      Not so much deluding themselves, JR, but being pragmatic. All the homosexual so-called charities have offices in London. A mere moped ride away from the East London muslims. They may not publish a scurrilous rag with Mohamed on the cover every week, but recognise that ‘good relations’ with Islam (that is, not mentioning their oppressors) means they get to live…

    • Mark

      They are being very political it seems to me.
      They are using the “you are only concerned about Islamic practices and ideas, in order to bash Muslims” (a beleaguered minority in their eyes).

      It’s a bit like Jess Philips on Question Time, when faced with an audience question about the mass sexual assaults in Cologne on New Year’s Eve 2015, said, “Oh that’s just like a Friday night on Broad Street”. Which either means she belittled the Cologne assaults, or doesn’t care about mass sexual assaults in Birmingham. But she can show no concern, because that would be siding with the “Islamophobes”. Other feminists of this type are like that too. Owen Jones also joins in.

      Of course, other feminists are concerned, just as other gay people are concerned about the Islamic outlook on many things.

    • petej

      The bible also commands the execution of gay people (or rather men who have sex with other men).

      • Martin

        Pete

        There’s no difference.

      • To signify the gravity of the offence in the Holy Land where God dwelt with His people. The Mosaic penalties no longer apply.

      • The Snail

        But Christians assess the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) by the life and teaching of Jesus. After all he said several times “You have heard it said in old times…. but I say to you” That is he moved the discussion forward, just as the Old Testament does. Most of the Law of the Old testament is disregarded by Christians – wearing mixed fabrics, all the ceremonials and sacrificial system, Levirate Marriage, the interpretation of the Sodom & Gomorrah incident etc.

        • Ahem …. did you think this would go unnoticed “the interpretation of the Sodom & Gomorrah incident etc.”?

      • Anton

        Christians are not to take the law into their own hands.

    • Anton

      Right up until it’s too late!

  • dannybhoy

    I remember when people had ‘Pride in London’, but that was because it was our capital city and people who lived in London were by and large proud of the city in which they lived..

    • Dreadnaught

      Danny its a vicious down at heel scruffy dump. I am not proud of my Capital City.

      • CliveM

        Now Edinburgh that’s a capital to be proud of.

        • Sir John Oldcastle

          That’s a joke, right Clive?

          • CliveM

            Nope Dominic it isn’t. Lived there for six years, loved it.

            Not claiming it’s perfect.

          • dannybhoy

            That’s known as a disclaimer..

          • Anton

            Those years were when you were in your prime?

          • CliveM

            Yep!

          • Anton

            Trust you got the reference to Jean Brodie!

          • Martin

            Who?

          • Anton

          • CliveM

            I am the creme de la creme!

            But no I didn’t. Sadly.

          • When, in 1972?

          • CliveM

            A lot more recently than that.

            Cheek!

      • Sarky

        Its not our capital, its a whole different country.

  • Or that of gay (ex-)Muslims who seek to highlight the Islamophobia in their religion.

    Surely you mean homophobia?

    • Um.. yes, yes (phobia-blindness). Bless you.

      • Inspector General

        Alleged homophobia, that man. On a thread about a radio host on PN, a certain Helen Wilson has unearthed the awful truth…

        Helen Wilson • 2 hours ago
        Islamic countries used to have a very healthy attitude towards people being gay, its only the last 100 years and Theresa May’s friends in Saudi Arabia spreading radical Islam being gay has been a problem.
        1
        •Reply•Share ›

        Quite frankly, it makes a fellow ashamed of being Christian, white and Western….

        • “Alleged homophobia, that man those ashes”.

  • Sarky

    More importantly the new Dr Who is a woman….the end times are truly here.

    (He says with tongue planted firmly in cheek)

    • Mark

      And it seems a cisgender one at that.

      What about transgender, non-binary or gender fluid? It seems the BBC are still not up with the times.

      Apart from that, I look forward to the episodes where she takes ages to get ready to go out, spends two hours nattering on the phone, and I wonder if she has ever seen a screwdriver, let alone a sonic one.

      (also tongue in cheek. Not really needed to be pointed out, but seeing as I didn’t point that out on the BBC Facebook page, I’m being called all sorts of names there).

      • petej

        It seems you’ve time travelled here from the sixteenth century.

        In the twenty first century women are considered the equals of men.

        • Mark

          Huh?

          • petej

            Yes, now they are allowed to vote, own property and even provide for their families.

          • Mark

            Did you even read what I wrote? Do you understand facetious comedy? Can you get through an episode of Have I Got News For You and understand satire? Honestly.

          • petej

            As a son, brother, cousin, grandson and uncle to brilliant women, no I don’t find sexism funny.

          • Mark

            The point is, it was not sexism. Did you see the “tongue in cheek” point? It was a play on stereotypical thinking. Just don’t go near Viz comic. Your head will explode.

          • petej

            It sounded pretty sexist to me.

          • Then sexism is in the ear of the listener, innit.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Seriously…you old guys tend to be sexist because you were raised at a time when women were considered to be unintelligent , treated like dim wits, because most were not engaged in the world with jobs and spent their life at home as domestic slaves .

            Younger men have been raised differently where they are expected to contribute 50 percent to the domestic chores and the care of the children, because their wives have to work and in some circumstances have more demanding and better paid jobs.

            I know a lot of your rhetoric about women is just provocative joking to get a rise from the few women on this blog. Although sometimes you sail a bit close to the wind and I feel you could do with a slap with the wooden spoon:)The new commenters on here don’t know you.

            However some of your peers (in terms of age)on this blog are misogynists. Misogyny, slavery, exploitation of workers are all anti Christian concepts. This does not seem to have penetrated their foggy fogey brains.

          • Watchman

            Wow, your last paragraph comes straight from the new age/liberal dictionary of what is Christian. How about reading your bible in order to find the real answer and not the answer you’d like it to give?

          • Cressida de Nova

            I have the answer and it is not in your fantasy Protestant cult edition.

          • Watchman

            From where did it arise, from the mists of time, from philosophy or did you devise it all yourself. It’s all very dangerous, you know depending on human beings.

            Proverbs 14:12
            There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.

          • Surely your not suggesting that misogyny, slavery and the exploitation of workers are Christian concepts?

          • Watchman

            No, Jack, I am not, but Cressida suggested they were all anti-Christian concepts which is not quite the same thing. Misogyny and exploitation of workers are an idea developed by the liberal/left with some help from avowed “feminists”. They attempt to redefine Judeo-Christian teaching as alien to 21st century liberal/left culture as though that was the only moral way in which we should see human rights. In other words, it is a manipulation of our language in order to promote an alternative to traditional biblical teaching. Slavery used to be part of the social fabric in biblical times: a man could be slave to pay off a debt or as surety for a loan and there was usually a contract outlining the deal. Paul called himself a bondservant, which is another name for a slave; he was a servant held by a bond or contract.

            In any event Jesus said that His Kingdom was not of this world and as His followers we should more concern ourselves with doing as He commanded than pandering to the passions of the world.

          • Jack can assure you that Cressida is not of a liberal disposition.

          • Watchman

            You could have fooled me! Then I suggest she’s a Pharisee, making it up as she goes along.

          • Stick around. You’re new here.

          • Watchman

            That sounded like “down boy, know your place”, but I’m trying very hard to be humble in the face of such patronisation so I will try to remain calm.

          • It takes a while to settle into this little community, Watchman. It’s always wise to read the Disqus profiles before forming and expressing hasty opinions about commenters.

          • Watchman

            Jack, if you continue with this patronisation I shall forget my self professed humility and start to be naughty.

          • Go ahead, Watchman. Just remember, Jack is a tender soul and has snowflake tendencies.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Please don’t suggest he stay…What is that nice term for moron? (cerebrally challenged) We don’t need that.

          • Couldn’t pour water out of a boot with instructions on the heel.

            The wheel’s spinning, but the hamster’s dead.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Odious creature…clang your cymbals and bells somewhere else.

          • Watchman

            I’m sorry if you’re upset. Bless you, I’ll pray for you.

          • Hmmm ….
            Jack has always regarded it as a great shame that mothers of the young are obliged to work in our modern economic system as opposed to choosing to work.

          • Cressida de Nova

            I agree it is terrible that they obliged to work and cannot look after their children at home at least until they are of school age.

          • Btw, your original comment was ageist and stereotypical.

            My own dear mother was the intellectual superior to my father. We always went to her for help with our homework. Jack inherited her brains and creativity, btw. She dedicated her life to looking after her children and husband. He dedicated his life to caring and providing for us. It worked rather well.

          • Inspector General

            What is ‘sexist’ other than some perceived irritation an effete arse like you is bothered about…

          • Rather effetteophobic and arseophobic of you, Inspector! He didn’t choose to be effete – or an arse.
            What came first – the effete or the arse?

          • Pubcrawler

            A fundamental question.

          • If he believed it was sexist – then it was.

          • Cressida de Nova

            There is nothing funny about a bunch of geriatric men sneering at women.

          • Watchman

            At my age I see nothing funny about women sneering at geriatric men. It’s all a matter of taste really!

          • “As a son, brother, cousin, grandson and uncle …. “
            How terribly patriarchal of you.

          • Ronbo2571

            You obviously have a sense of humour bi pass as well.
            The ability to laugh at one’s self is a quality you lack.Lighten up buddy,Mark was joking.

          • petej

            As I said to him I don’t find sexism funny.

          • Watchman

            Why not?

          • Cressida de Nova

            Martin lives under a rock. He is not aware of this.

        • Martin

          Pete

          Trouble is, men can’t have babies.

        • Cressida de Nova

          And they also do equal jobs including technical engineering and all the jobs that were considered to be the preserve of men. This does not make them less feminine. They are clever and more versatile than men and can combine their work with a lot of other interesting activities.
          Mark’s stereotyping of a woman being a bimbo only attests to his own moronic mentality and limited experience.

          PS
          Dr Who should be a man
          Wonder Woman should be a woman
          Priests should be male
          Snow White should be a drippy saccaharine heterosexual female a sort of Mark fancier

          Xenia warrior princess should slap men about more than she does

          I am not a politically correct person

          • petej

            I couldn’t disagree more. There is no reason why the Doctor must be played by a man (especially as the show has already shown several times that timelords are not restricted to a single gender)

            It’s up to Jesus who he gives to be priests.

    • Inspector General

      Keep this to yourself, but that’s only part of the plan. The BBC is about to announce it will no longer broadcast Premiership football. Instead, we’ll all be able to sit back and be thrilled by Arsenal Ladies versus Manchester Women….

      • John

        Someone for his lesbian assistant to fantasize over as they travel through time…

        • Inspector General

          This homosexual commentator from PN has the best insight. The new agenda continues unabated. It goes without saying that this observation will without doubt feature in whatever madcap plots await.

          Fortunately, the writer up til now, the unfathomable Moffat, has managed to reduce the audience of the program from 10 million at its recent peak to a mere 2 million. One feels assured it will fall even lower soon, to mere tens of thousands, and the plug pulled.
          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
          Bitterbear • 2 hours ago
          The doctor is trans. To be specific, a Protandrous Hermaphrodite. Lil’ bit of context: It means that they are born as functional males but at later stages in life they transition into biological females.

          •Reply•Share ›

          • Anton

            Doctor Who?

    • dannybhoy

      Doesn’t seem to stop you talking though Sarkers..
      (A bag of giant gobstopppers are in the way through the post)
      I need to have a look at that BBC link you ungraciously threw on the web coffee table recently…
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/earth/

    • Martin

      Sarky

      What do you expect, it’s the BBC.

      • Sarky

        I don’t actually care, she’s a brilliant actress!!

        • IrishNeanderthal

          Telegraph — Doctor Who: Jodie Whittaker becomes 13th Time Lord, urging fans ‘not to be scared by my gender’

          I am not scared of her sex, but this gender thing sounds like something cooked up at Harvard.

    • Albert

      I have to say I groaned at that. The BBC trying too hard. They’ll be embarrassed before long, it will look so dated.

    • Anton

      James Bond next?

      • Albert

        Why not? If the place of Jesus can be taken by a women through ordination, then why not a female James Bond?

        • Anton

          The place of Jesus cannot be taken by anybody of any sex.

          • Albert

            Okay, I obviously realise that some Protestants will not accept the idea of the priest acting in persona Christi (although I don’t know why, it’s obvious that anyone who presides at the Holy Communion is taking that place, and Jesus himself said: He who receives you receives me, and he who receives me receives him who sent me. While Paul says Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ.). However, the fact is that some in the CofE do accept this doctrine. Indeed, this point seems undeniable, given that the abolsution given in the Visitation of Sick, says:

            “Here shall the sick person be moved to make a special confession of his sins, if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty matter. After which confession, the Priest shall absolve him (if he humbly and heartily desire it) after this sort.

            OUR Lord Jesus Christ, who hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners who truly repent and believe in him, of his great mercy forgive thee thine offences: And by his authority committed to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.”

            So the CofE has endorsed the position of a woman acting in the person of Christ. The fact that you don’t accept the premise of this doesn’t alter what the CofE has done.

          • Anton

            I’m not in the CoE!

          • Dominic Stockford

            The Reformed Prayer Book of 1789 which I would use has removed such heresy from it.

          • Albert

            Is that the American BCP of 1789, Dominic?

          • You have to give it to protestants. Everything they personally disagree with is heresy!

          • Watchman

            Sorry, Anton the place of Jesus cannot be taken by anybody!

      • Sarky

        Jane bond?

  • Sir John Oldcastle

    “Not tolerate discrimination of any kind” – as a conservative, Bible teaching following Christian I find that somewhat errant as a claim of theirs.

    • petej

      I don’t believe the bible teaches discrimination (that’s Gods job), but I’m confused why you think the organisers of Pride should be following Christina principles?

      • Martin

        Pete

        You really are an idiot. Discrimination is a fact of life, and what of the sheep and goats – there’s a bit of discrimination going on there.

        • Gregory Morris

          Epitaph:
          Here lies a race relations bod
          Who doubtless now is telling God
          That he commits a crime to keep
          Distinguishing the goats from sheep.

          The Spectator c. 1990s

      • Sir John Oldcastle

        So “pride” should be allowed to discriminate against conservative bible-teaching Christians, despite professing not to tolerate discrimination? Odd position to hold.

        • petej

          Anyone is welcome to come to pride or march in the march.

          • Carrying a placard stating: “Homosexual acts are Intrinsically Disordered.”

          • Dominic Stockford

            Including those carrying banners with Biblical texts condemning homosexuality on them? I don’t think so.

            So basically ‘pride’ does discriminate against those who hold a different opinion from them, no matter what they might claim. And those Christians who meet and offer a prayer protest each year need police protection for what reason? Is it because they are *not* discriminated against by ‘pride’? Again, I don’t think so.

          • petej

            I wasn’t at pride in London this year, but I heard from others that people with such banners were indeed in attendance. They were not marching, but as it is a March *for* gay rights that would be unlikely.

            Millions of people attend pride and police protection is a must for any sizeable crowd. The police are not there solely to protect anti gay protestors.

          • Anton

            A gay friend of mine politely but definitely rejected my use of the word “march” for it, in favour of “parade”.

          • petej

            You are completely right that It is called a parade, but I was using the word “march” to highlight that it is first and foremost a protest against inequality and ill treatment of LGBT+ people

          • Marty McFuckface

            No, it’s a parade of degeneracy. Ever seen one, dude?

          • Dominic Stockford

            I didn’t say that they were *only* there for that, but they HAVE to protect the Christian protesters. Which rather undermines the claim of the ‘pride’ organisation to be non-discriminatory, and not to support any discrimination. If they didn’t they would not march for fear of the terrible discrimination they are causing against (true) Christians and the teaching of the Word of God by doing so.

            And if you seriously think for one minute that a group of Christians opposing the march and carrying banners quoting the Bible on homosexuality would be allowed to take part in the march then you’re completely off your trolley. (Whether or not they would want to is irrelevant to the thrust of the claim to be non-discriminatory in every way.)

          • petej

            I’m not sure if pride in London *do* claim to be non-discriminatory nor why you expect them to be responsible for the behaviour of everyone in London. The police are there to protect everyone so I don’t understand why you think this is discriminatory?!

            Why would Christians who oppose gay rights want to march in favour of gay rights?! There is an understanding that groups who march should be in favour of the aims of the march. I don’t think what you are complaining about makes any sense!

            If you had applied to join the march and been denied on grounds of religious belief then I might have some sympathy, but I know that one of the largest groups who were marching was a Christian group. There were also Jews and Muslims marching.

            I think you are trying to claim PIL are bigoted, but actually they are so far from that they even let protestors attend.

          • Marty McFuckface

            Ha ha – “millions”. It is never more than about 5,000 – the media grossly overestimate it, and the number of people coming into town for this parade of perversion is about a third the number that flee town to avoid seeing semi-naked faggots.

    • Watchman

      God hates pride and this is, I believe a sin that condemns far more then their sexual amorality. It is condemned far more biblically than anything else.

      Proverbs 8:13
      To fear the LORD is to hate evil. I hate arrogant pride, evil conduct, and perverse speech.

      Psalm 31:18
      Let lying lips be quieted; they speak arrogantly against the righteous with pride and contempt.

      Proverbs 16:18
      Pride comes before destruction, and an arrogant spirit before a fall.

      1 John 2:16-17
      For everything that belongs to the world— the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride in one’s lifestyle— is not from the Father, but is from the world. And the world with its lust is passing away, but the one who does God’s will remains forever. …

      • Dominic Stockford

        Your last quote is one I used on a poster board as I stood outside a church in Teddington protesting, where the vicar was giving a presentation on how wonderful he thinks same-sex marriage is. He probably is less keen on it now, as more objectors (5) turned up than did supporters. And he also got a fearful wigging from Richard Chartres.

        • Anton

          Well done!

  • JJ

    In a Gay Pride parade (a parade that is asserting that being gay is something to be proud of) “Allah is Gay” is a complement. Anyone who complains that it is offensive is asserting that being gay is something negative. THEY are the “haters”.

    • petej

      Amen!

    • Have you been drinking?

      • JJ

        I was going to ask you to be specific in your criticism, rather than let you just being facetiously dismissive. But then I browsed your Disqus history which suggests you’re religious. You may well be somewhat reasonable, but I’m weary of trying to reason with the religious.

        • If you haven’t been drinking, then your logic is flawed and dismissive of reasoned debate with anyone who doesn’t share your prejudicial premise i.e. that homosexual desire should be universally accepted as natural.

          • Ronbo2571

            Stick to the topic,don’t name call but use reasoned argument.
            Gay people do not choose to be gay and so homosexual desire is perfectly normal.
            Why deny others the ability to love?That is very nasty.

          • Martin

            Of course they choose to be ‘gay’, they choose their sexual sin. And it isn’t love but lust.

          • Are you suggesting free will. Martin?

          • Martin

            HJ

            As I’ve said before, they gave their free will to their master, their sin, and now they are slaves of sin.

          • But, if they are born totally “dead in their sin”, and only the “elect” are given the grace to be “reborn”, then where is the “choice”?

          • Martin

            HJ

            The choice is in the sin that they make their master.

          • But, according to your interpretation, they’re born incapable of making any other “choice”.

          • Martin

            HJ

            Remember

            as it is written:
            None is righteous, no, not one;
            no one understands;
            no one seeks for God.
            All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
            no one does good,
            not even one.
            Their throat is an open grave;
            they use their tongues to deceive.
            The venom of asps is under their lips.
            Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.
            Their feet are swift to shed blood;
            in their paths are ruin and misery,
            and the way of peace they have not known.
            There is no fear of God before their eyes.
            (Romans 3:10-18 [ESV])

          • Cressida de Nova

            Is there any kind of love that has an element of lust?

          • Martin

            Cressida

            How about:

            Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, (Ephesians 5:25 [ESV])

          • Cressida de Nova

            Lust is a strong sexual desire. So what you are saying is that husbands and wives should forgo that. I am presuming this is what you mean….Sex is sinful…In the movies Puritans are portrayed like this. I just did not realise it was true.
            Scary !

          • In Catholic teaching, lust is simply defined as an inordinate desire for sexual pleasure. Such pleasure is considered disordered (sinful) when sought after for itself and removed from the unitive and procreative dimensions of marriage. It is pursued for selfish pleasure alone.

            We are called to Chasity. As defined in the Catechism, “Chastity means the successful integration of sexuality within the person and thus the inner unity of man in his bodily and spiritual being” Chastity enables us to respect the dignity of our human sexuality and the sacredness of marital love. Chastity moves us to look upon each person as a person, not as a body, and to respect their inherent dignity. In chastity, a person strives for mastery over feelings and passions, respects the sacredness of mental and physical love, and takes responsibility for his actions.

            As Anton revealed recently, many protestants regard “the flesh” as being at war with the Spirit and that such desires have to be annihilated by Christ indwelling in us and/or forensically covered by Him. Catholics, on the other hand, enjoy life and all it has to offer. We see human passions as good in themselves once directed at the purpose for which they exist. Far from killing “the flesh”, we believe in channelling passions in accordance with God’s will and with the help of His grace.

          • CliveM

            I know more than one Protestant who enjoys life and all that (in the best possible way) it can offer.

            It has to be said, suspicion of the ‘flesh’ can be found amongst Catholics as well.

          • Nobody has ever claimed Catholics are perfect. We just aim to be …. and. of course, are on the correct path.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Probably only over here. The rest of the Catholic world does not have that stitched Protestant puritanical attitude to sex.

          • CliveM

            Outside perhaps one commentator on this blog, I have yet to meet any Protestants (or Jews, or Hindus or even, gasp, Catholic) with a stitched up Puritanical attitude to sex. Although as I say contrary to contemporary myth, the Puritans had a healthy view of sex.

            It’s a strange thing about sex, but as far as I can see, whatever the alleged contemporary view, on the ground as it were, people are usually still at it like rabbits.

          • Anton

            As ̶A̶n̶t̶o̶n̶ St Paul revealed ̶r̶e̶c̶e̶n̶t̶l̶y̶ 2000 years ago, many protestants regard “the flesh” as being at war with the Spirit and that [sinful] desires have to be annihilated by Christ indwelling in us and/or forensically covered by Him:

            we know that the whole creation groans and labours with birth pangs together until now. Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body – from Romans 8.

          • As Yoda Anton says to Luke Skywalker Happy Jack: “Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter.”

            Sinful desires need to be reordered and used as intended by our Creator – not annihilated. As the Psalmist says:
            “For thou didst form my inward parts: Thou didst cover me in my mother’s womb. I will give thanks unto thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: Wonderful are thy works; And that my soul knoweth right well. My frame was not hidden from thee, When I was made in secret, And curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.
            Thine eyes did see mine unformed substance . . .
            (Ps 139:13-16)

            If God had wanted us to kill this crude matter, He would not have become man; He would not have taken on flesh. He would not have submitted to a cruel and unjust execution. He does not call us to be “spiritual” people. He called us to serve him in our bodies and with our bodies.

          • Anton

            I agree but I can’t imagine why you think this is a response to my comment.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Well of course human passion is good…it is the inspiration for the creation of great music art and literature and other endeavours. The “flesh” is to be celebrated. This Puritan approach is extremely twisted and dangerous to mental health.

          • Anton

            The Puritans were not puritanical! The noun came from them, the adjective from their enemies. In regard to “the flesh”, they understood very well the difference between the Song of Songs and Romans 8.

          • CliveM

            Before Anton says it, the Puritans liked sex to.

          • Anton

            I’m not aware that they wrote about it. Too much is written about it. Based on that you would think it is very difficult, when in fact it is too easy.

          • CliveM

            There is plenty of evidence that they had a normal healthy attitude to marital sex.

            Most people did in that era, in many ways it’s this era that has an unhealthy view.

          • Hi

            I would say Jews do as well.

          • CliveM

            Most people do. Otherwise they die out!

          • Cressida de Nova

            What Martin is saying is you are obliged to pro create but you must take no pleasure in it because sexual pleasure is sinful

          • CliveM

            Poor Mrs Martin.

          • Martin

            Cressida

            I think you can get the picture from what Paul says:

            To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.
            (I Corinthians 7:8-9 [ESV])

          • He also said:

            “To the unmarried, and to the widows, I would say that they will do well to remain in the same state as myself, but if they have not the gift of continence, let them marry; better to marry than to feel the heat of passion.”

            What do you suppose he meant by the “heat of passion”?

          • dannybhoy

            Having regular rows?

          • Cressida de Nova

            LOL

          • Martin

            HJ

            And that has what relevance?

            Incidentally that passage demonstrates why Rome is wrong to demand the ‘discipline’ of celibacy from its ‘clergy’.

          • That’s not a rational argument. Because one has sexual desires – chosen or not – one does not have to act on them. Desire does not justify behaviour.
            – I did not choose to want sex with a post-box.
            – Therefore desire for sex with a post-box is normal.
            What you really mean is you should be free to do as you choose with your body with the consent of another adult (or with an inanimate object). This doesn’t mean Jack is obliged to agree it is normal or healthy, and you should respect his right to disagree.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Post box? You’re scaring me Jack

          • Are you a post-box? If not, you have no need to fear. Besides, Jack has given his heart to the one at the top of his road.

          • Go and love quietly then. There’s no need to parade your love in front of everyone.

          • Watchman

            They could choose not to be homosexual (forgive me, I cannot call them gay as it is a misnomer.)

        • Martin

          I gather your religion is global warming.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Do you think pollution is an environmental problem today. If not why not?

          • Anton

            Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant.

          • Cressida de Nova

            I did not mention CO2 . There are many forms of pollution. You must know that.

          • Anton

            Yes of course, but it was not obvious that you had changed the subject.

          • Chefofsinners

            Jacob Re-Smogg, for instance.

          • Martin

            Cressida

            Sin is the greater problem.

          • Dominic Stockford

            I went to a church once where the preacher introduced a sermon on the Prodigal Son parable by announcing that, as they had said last week, the greatest problem of man is…

            No, not sin, as I was expecting, but rather ‘alienation’. He managed to preach for 35 minutes without once using the word sin. Poor, very, very poor.

          • Anton

            Last time I was in the USA I went to the local episcopalian church on a Sunday, because it was nearby. I noticed the total absence of the s-word throughout the service including what liturgy there was.

          • But sin is alienation – from God, from our neighbour and from one’s true self. It’s a consequence of the Fall.

          • Dominic Stockford

            You will not find the word ‘alienation’ anywhere in the Bible, but you will find ‘sin’ – which is not alienation. That is a consequence of our sin.

          • We can only use language found in the bible? Are you serious? Better not use “Trinity” then; or “Incarnation”.
            As a consequence of the Fall, “sin” entered the world. Original sin brought to our first parents the alienation from paradise and separation from God and one another, and with it all the effects of mortality: pain, illness, suffering, aging, death and decay. Much of the Old Testament, as well as the Pharisees, understood sin as infraction against God’s commands. Jesus’ teaching and example contradict this perspective of sin. When we read about Jesus in the gospels we find that sin has to do with relationships – with God, with ourselves and with one another. In heaven, the original harmony between body and soul will be restored, as will the harmony with God and the world around us. Sin will be no more. Alienation will be no more.

          • Cressida de Nova

            It is a sin to pollute the planet. I am not going to list the many and varied ways we have been doing it. Everyone should know. It gets plenty of media coverage. Why don’t you think it is a sin to rubbish and pollute God’s great treasure to us.?

          • Watchman

            Is something a sin because you have decreed it to be a sin?

          • Martin

            Cressida

            The Earth has been given to us to use. Some of the claimed ‘pollution’ is nothing of the sort, but the greatest pollutant is our immorality and failure to give to God the glory that is His.

          • Cressida de Nova

            We are stewards of the earth. I find it hard to believe that you do not think you have a responsibility to care for the natural world . This planet belongs to Him….

          • Martin

            Of course we do, but we also have authority to use it, and the problems are overrated.

        • Chefofsinners

          Commenters on this blog are mostly religious. The clue is in the title.

      • Anton

        It’s just his Higher Understanding.

    • Ronbo2571

      Good argument.

    • Chefofsinners

      Suppose I carried a placard saying “Gays are gay.” and “Stephen Fry is a fag”. Would I be welcome?

  • John

    An argument for objectively equal treatment under the law for Christians, Muslims and gay rights activists. Nice try Cranmer. Recent history has taught me to not hold my breath.

  • Ian G
    • petej

      Do you think the gays just have one opinion?

      • Ian G

        Have you read the articles? Of course not, but those who prefer freedom are being shouted down.

        • petej

          I’ve read about the case.

          It was not pride, but another protest march and one of the causes was to protest the treatment of Palestinians by the Israeli government.

          I think you will find that you will find gay people who are pro-Israel, pro-Palestine, neither, Jewish, Muslim, neither just as straight people also fall into all these categories.

          • Ian G

            Does protesting the alleged behaviour of the Israeli government justify throwing Jews off the march? It was a Dyke march (sic) and the left invented intersectionality.

          • petej

            No of course not, but you cannot blame all gay people for this act.

          • Lonesome Whistle

            Like they are blaming all Jews!

    • dannybhoy

      I have to say I seriously dislike the cheapening of the flag of Israel to celebrate Jewish members of the LGBT+++ community.
      When one considers the traumatic events leading up to the birth of the nation of Israel, it seems to rather trivialise the whole thing.
      Or am I being puritanical….

      • dannybhoy

        Thank you Patricia. Care to elaborate on that uptick? :0)

        • dannybhoy

          Why are ladies so reluctant to post on this blog? Apart from The Inspector I am unaware of any rabid misogynists here..

          • magnolia

            I’m not….

            Being female helps you see more of them. Having the opinion that you, your daughters, female relations and friends are (effectively) second rate due to biology rammed at you from time to time is very off-putting hence only the brave, the tough, the obdurate or the damaged and self-hating stick around long.

            Call me obdurate!

          • dannybhoy

            Women are not second rate. Women are equal with men in worth and different as regards roles. I am pleased that you continue posting here Magnolia. It may well be that many ladies simply dislike the sometimes aggressive or forceful expression of opinions evidenced here?

          • You wife made you write that, didn’t she?

          • dannybhoy

            She’s- a- lovely-woman-my-wife. I-would-not-be-where-I-am-today-without-her-Ow!-help-and-guidance..

          • Jack wouldn’t dare!

      • Not more so than the Rainbow when you consider what it signifies and what went before it being used by God.
        Are you being Puritanical?

        • dannybhoy

          I have a certain tendency..

          • Have you informed your wife?

          • dannybhoy

            Tah Dahhh!

        • Hi

          Rainbows are cool and very important symbols in Judaism for a variety of reasons.

          • Jack was taught that when a rainbow appears in the sky, it is a sign that man has sinned, but God has remembered His covenant. So, when seeing a rainbow, we should thank God for not sending another flood.

            A rainbow can also signify the beauty of the divine presence and the glory of the Creator. The prophet Ezekiel described a vision in which he had seen the divine presence “like a rainbow in the clouds on a rainy day …”

          • Hi

            Yes and thirdly in the mystical school it is said that before the mashiach comes, an especially bright and colourful rainbow will appear.

            “May we merit seeing it soon, and in our lifetimes.” Amen.

        • Alien & Stranger

          The rainbow has 7 colours – the perfect number of God.
          The gay flag has 6 colours, which is the number of man.
          Fallen and degenerate man perverts what God has created and ordained.

      • Ian G

        That the gays should say that being Jewish and gay is wrong has a certain irony, I agree with you about the flag.

        • dannybhoy

          Imagine a local chapter of the LGBT+ community trying to drum up support in Sodom and Gommorah..

      • Lonesome Whistle

        Israel didn’t happen because of the holocaust.

        The holocaust happened because there was no Israel.

        • dannybhoy

          Why was there no Israel?
          That’s the real question..

  • petej

    If the East London Mosque refuse to even meet with LGBT Muslims then what were they doing at Pride in the first place? Or is the case (as with so many conservative groups) they are offended by Pride in the comfort of their own homes?!

    Pride has changed now quite dramatically from the protest movement it once was into a broader festival. This has put huge challenges on the organisers because placards acceptable to a protest march are not necessarily acceptable in a corporate fundraiser and because individuals are getting involved in Pride now who are not necessarily motivated by a desire for equality.

    • Lonesome Whistle

      “If the East London Mosque refuse to even meet with LGBT Muslims then what were they doing at Pride in the first place? ”

      Looking for free sex.

  • Demon Teddy Bear

    I suspect the mullahs will win this one. The threat of a bit of Islamic “peaceful persuasion” will cow the enthusiasts for bum sex. What a pity they can’t both lose tho.

    • Lonesome Whistle

      “What a pity they can’t both lose tho.”

      ^THIS^

  • Murti Bing

    Turkish Delight, anyone?

  • Albert

    Jesus had two fathers

    I was a bit unclear as to whether this did appear at the “London Pride” (can we rename that ale please?). So I Googled it, and found, oddly enough that this is a notice from American “churches” – Anglican and Methodist. With Christians like that, who needs enemies of the Gospel?

    • Mother’s Pride.

      “Mother’s Pride’s a family. A family of bread”. One advertisement featured Dusty Springfield singing the jingle “Knocker-Upper.”

    • Anton

      We could always reply that His two fathers are Abraham and God.

      • Albert

        Excellent! I hadn’t thought of that! Though somehow I don’t think that’s what they meant!

    • Royinsouthwest

      Don’t all Christians have two fathers? Actually, it could be argued that everyone, Christian or not, has two fathers, since the parable of the Prodigal Son depicts a typical person in rebellion against his Heavenly Father.

      • Albert

        Another excellent reply to this poster!

      • Well said.

    • Linus

      Three fathers actually…

      https://goo.gl/images/SihX92

      • Albert

        You are disgusting, Linus.

        • Linus

          Exactly the word I would apply to you, priest of a homophobic cult that for centuries has turned a blind eye to the systematic abuse of children by its clergy.

          Priest = child molester in the popular imagination. That’s the reputation you have to live with. And it doesn’t get much more disgusting than that, does it?

          • Homosexual priest = sexual abuser of teenage boys.

          • Linus

            That’s right. Every girl and woman sexually assaulted by a Catholic priest was a victim of homosexual aggression, weren’t they? Every nun who abused single mothers and left their children to die without care in “Mother and Baby Homes” was a raving lesbian.

            Some gay men do become priests. When you grow up among religious bigots it can be an effective way to hide. But sexual and physical abuse meted out by the Catholic clergy is most certainly not limited to the molestation of young boys. Your refusal to face that marks you out as the partisan bigot you are.

          • Merchantman

            They do it however in defiance of the founder’s prohibition.

        • It merely shows his debauchery and degradation.

          • Albert

            Quite.

      • Chefofsinners

        Obviously not a complete bastard then.

        • Linus

          Who are you talking about?

          If it’s god the father then as we have no idea where he came from, calling him a bastard would be jumping to conclusions. For all we know his parents, whoever they were (Isanami and Isanagi, perhaps? … but that’s just speculation) were married.

          If you mean the son, as he was not the biological son of the man his mother was married to, then he certainly counts as illegitimate.

          The status of the holy spirit is less clear however. Is it a person? If so, if you believe the Catholics and say it proceeds from the father AND the son, then according to currently accepted definitions of marriage which exclude unions between close relatives, it is indeed a bastard. However if the Orthodox church is right and it proceeds only from the father and is therefore a parthenogenic excrescence, the term wouldn’t seem appropriate.

          Decide for yourself. I certainly don’t know.

          • Chefofsinners

            I was talking about you.

          • Linus

            I was born in Christian wedlock so even by your narrow-minded standards I am no bastard.

          • Chefofsinners

            So the rumours about your mum and the Inspector General are untrue?

          • Linus

            By all means bear false witness against my mother. One more reason for your sky pixie to send you to hell, if he exists. And if he doesn’t, well my mother is no longer alive, so your insults can’t hurt or offend her.

            As for me, I already hold you in such contempt that nothing could worsen my opinion of you. You are scum. And when scum sinks to the bottom of a pond and slowly rots there, it’s already gone as low as it can go. Nobody should be surprised if the foul stench of decay bubbles to the surface. Rotten things smell rotten. That’s their nature.

          • Chefofsinners

            No offence intended.

          • Linus

            No offence intended? You intimated that my mother had an adulterous affair with a mad Irish bigot and you didn’t intend to offend me?

            Of course it isn’t possible for you to offend me because to be offended, you have to take a person seriously enough to take account of what he says. I know exactly how much of a waste of space you are, so your idiotic comments are just shrugged off as the ravings of a lunatic. But the fact that I’m not offended doesn’t change the fact that your intention was to offend. Nobody – least of all a Christian – makes disobliging remarks about a person’s mother without intending to offend. Backpedal all you like. I know exactly what you meant and I pity you for it. But then I already did. So nothing much has changed.

            Except perhaps that your claim to be a Christian looks more tenuous than ever. Bearing false witness is behaviour hated by your sky pixie, yet you unashamedly indulge in it without showing any sign of repentence. But then the rules don’t apply to you, do they? Because you’re special.

            In your dreams…

          • Chefofsinners

            One thought you might be complemented by the suggestion that you were descended from the IG.

          • Linus

            As I thought, no attempt to repent of your sin of bearing false witness.

            You’d rather burn in your sky pixie’s punishment furnace than admit you’ve committed a heinous sin. Presumably the task of admitting fault before someone like me is too much for you. So we can add pride to the lost of your unrepented sins too.

            Ah well, none of this will change the obliviousness of the oblivion you, I and everyone else will most likely end up in. But if your wee Willie Winkie of a deity really does exist, I’ll see you in the flames. My own suffering will be considerably ameliorated by the sight of you shrieking “Lord! Lord! I prophesied in your name! How can you do this to me?” I have a feeling I’ll be seeing most of those who post here in a similar posture.

          • Chefofsinners

            Are you sure you aren’t related to him?

  • Inspector General

    Sod Islam. We are seeing what must be the end of Doctor Who.

    Some years ago, the thing was being produced in Cardiff. In other words, on aa semi permanent on location basis.

    • Chefofsinners

      The Daleks are on a mission remove the gonads from every man in the universe.
      Exsperminate! Exsperminate!

      • Inspector General

        The new doctor will be equipped with a sonic hair dryer and posses impeccable dress sense…

        • Hi Inspector

          As there’s other time lords out there, such as the master, the monk, the rani , maybe they could do a spin off featuring your good self travelling through space time as “the inspector”. Your TARDIS could be disguised as “the mouse n wheel”.

    • Dominic Stockford

      With a female Doctor and a ‘lesbian’ companion, I think we can all see where this is going. The TV and the programme will not be going on in my house.

  • Chefofsinners

    Today I went on a heterosexual pride march. I didn’t carry any flags or banners, to avoid offending anyone. Nor did I go with anyone else, so as not to cause traffic problems. I didn’t shout out, chant or sing because street preachers get arrested for that sort of thing. Nor did I actually march, either. I stayed in my armchair. Because this is a free country and I am free to do as I choose, so long as I choose to do absolutely nothing.

    • Doctor Crackles

      I prefer not to use labels, such as heterosexual or straight. I am the husband of one wife!

      • Tsk …. you are the partner of one spouse.

        • Chefofsinners

          The teapot of one spout.

        • Doctor Crackles

          Thanks Jack

          1 Timothy 3:2

  • dannybhoy

    You are a very fine chap Clive.

    • Cressida de Nova

      He is very nice and my second favourite Protestant.

      • Anton

        …after Jesus.

        • Cressida de Nova

          LOL I had no idea your sense of humour was this good.

          • Anton

            And I am equally impressed by your upticking my comment! But who IS your favourite protestant?

          • Cressida de Nova

            Blue Dog even though he is snappy sometimes…because a while ago (before your time here) he spoke up on my behalf when I was destined for the chopper….excommunication from this blog for supporting a dodo dinosaur bird .You know what we Romish types are like….we never forget a favour… just like in the movie ” The Godfather ” 🙂

          • Anton

            Then please don’t forget the thread on which some ass (and I do remember which) commented that the Italians had always been a rabble, and I asked if he meant the same Italians who were responsible for the Roman Empire and the Renaissance.

          • Cressida de Nova

            I missed that one.

          • bluedog

            Heavens, Cressida, will you be making an offer I can’t refuse?

          • Cressida de Nova

            Settle down or you will be demoted to third place

      • dannybhoy

        He is indeed. A sensitive fellow who I would be pleased to call ‘friend’ as well as brother in the faith.
        You should look for some unattached devout Catholic chap like Clive, get yourself married, have lots of children and be a wonderful wife and mother….

  • Chefofsinners

    Excellent news. It has just been announced that Archbishop Cranmer is about to regenerate once more.
    The third Cranmer will be an asylum seeking minority ethnic disabled lesbian vicar who travels back in time to save the country from voting to leave the EU. Also starring Gillan Scott as travelling companion / love interest and token white male.

    • Do you think you might be trying too hard, Chef?

      Besides, lesbian suggests a sex (or is it gender?). What right do you have to categorise a person in this way? Sex and gender is irrelevant. What counts is how the person defines him/her/itself. As for Gillan, well, has this person advised you how he/she/it sees he/she/itself?

      • Chefofsinners

        Well, thank you for an entirely new experience, Jack, viz being accused of trying too hard. But what right do you have to categorise me in this way?

        • Jack was sensitive to your … um … sensitivity and merely suggested this so as not to be insensitive.

          • Chefofsinners

            I’m offended.

          • Victim.
            Jack is offended that you are offended.

          • Chefofsinners

            You’re banned from my heterosexual Protestant pride march.

          • Protestants are Poofs.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Gasp…I had no idea.

          • Anton

            Julius III to you!

          • Nah, you can keep him.

          • Anton

            He’s all yours.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Shame…it sounds like a good time with fun Proddies such as Dr Crackles and Watchman leading the march.

          • Chefofsinners

            We’re just going down to the corner shop for a scratch card a packet of condoms. Buy an indulgence and come with us!

          • Cressida de Nova

            I worry about you. You need to learn a musical instrument. A few hours practice per day on the harpsichord should do the trick

          • Chefofsinners

            It is a little known fact that I play the harpsichord with great skill. I am too hot to Handel.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Are you getting the t shirts made for Glastonbury next year?

          • Chefofsinners

            Tragically, there will not be a Glastonbury festival next year. My fan base is distraught. And so is the other one.

      • Dominic Stockford

        And this person of whatever or no gender decides to label themselves lesbian – why can they not do that? Language now clearly means whatever the person using it wants it to mean…..

        • But dear man, that’s the point. This person hasn’t attached this label to themselves. The Chef did it. If they call themselves a “teapot” one has to accept this.

          • Dominic Stockford

            I cannot be a teapot, for I am not short and stout.
            Maybe I’m a coffeepot, but I haven’t got a spout.

          • Too much information, Dominic! Jack advises you keep this to yourself.

      • Anton

        The new fluidity is between Catholic and atheist, as pioneered by Pope Francis himself…

        • Francis’ personal opinions are not binding on Catholics.

          • Anton

            Where in this thread did I suggest otherwise?

          • You implied it:
            “The new fluidity is between Catholic and atheist, as pioneered by Pope Francis, no less.”

            There is no fluidity between faith and atheism, whatever Francis says. Do you dispute that an atheist may be saved?

          • Cressida de Nova

            An atheist could only be saved in special circumstances. If atheism is based on narcissism and arrogance which it is in some circumstances , particularly amongst the science fraternity, then I think it is unlikely.If it results from sheer ignorance then a just God will not punish the cerebrally challenged.

            Atheism can be a sort of disease or malfunctioning of the brain. It is a natural response in all human beings to think that there is something more powerful outside of themselves existing in some form.

          • That is Church teaching.

            St. Paul wrote:
            “When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. (Rom 2:14-16)

            Paul’s words are carefully chosen. He did not say that those who are innocently ignorant of the truth will be saved; he keeps the possibility open.

            The Church recognizes that God does not condemn those who are innocently ignorant of the truth about his offer of salvation. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, quoting Vatican II, states:
            “Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation.”(CCC 847)

            Stubborn poddies are a different matter.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Stubborn Proddies? Pray do tell!

          • Jack’s lips are sealed. They know who they are.

          • Chefofsinners

            He means Pope Francis.

          • Anton

            I’ll see you in heaven, Jack.

          • Jack wouldn’t be so presumptuous, Anton.

          • Anton

            I don’t doubt my salvation. If you doubt yours, you needn’t.

          • “the person who places his faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and his blood shed at Calvary is eternally secure. He can never lose his salvation. No personal breaking of God’s or man’s laws or commandments can nullify that status …

            To deny the assurance of salvation would be to deny Christ’s perfect redemption …

            [N]o wrong act or sinful deed can ever affect the believer’s salvation. The sinner did nothing to merit God’s grace and likewise he can do nothing to demerit grace. True, sinful conduct always lessens one’s fellowship with Christ, limits his contribution to God’s work and can result in serious disciplinary action by the Holy Spirit.” (Wilson Ewin, There is Therefore Now No Condemnation)

            Do you subscribe to the above view?

          • Anton

            It would take some effort to compare that to what the Bible says. I know the criteria for salvation set out in scripture and I know that I know Jesus Christ, crucified died and risen. On those things I base my confidence.

          • “I know the criteria for salvation set out in scripture … “

            You know your own interpretation of scripture about salvation. There are a variety of doctrines emphasising one aspect of Bible teaching over another and applying different interpretations to Bible passages.

            The one thing all Christians agree on is that we can be saved only by the grace of God and we cannot save ourselves or determine our own fate after death. Is salvation available to all, or are some people predestined to be saved while others are condemned to hell? Are we justified by faith or doing good works or both? Can only Christians be saved? Once saved, always saved? Can salvation be lost?

          • Anton

            How keen you are to discuss the salvation of others! Good questions all, and we might discuss them – but the subject is whether one may know one is saved, and I do. Don’t you?

          • As Jack said, he would never be so presumptuous.

          • Anton

            So you are merely crossing your fingers about what happens after you die, with no assurance?

          • No. Jack is confident in the teachings of the Church and scripture. Just as we enter freely into a relationship with Christ, we are free to leave him. Paul again warns the Christians against being overconfident: “I pummel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.” (1 Corinthians 9:27)

          • No. Jack is confident in the teachings of the Church and scripture. Just as we enter freely into a relationship with Christ, we are free to leave him. Paul again warns the Christians against being overconfident: “I pummel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.” (1 Corinthians 9:27)

          • Linus

            I’m an Atheist and I know there’s something more powerful “outside of myself” (odd way to put it). Here on earth there are more powerful people than me. I’ve met some of them so I know they exist.

            In the rest of the universe there may be yet more powerful beings, but this I have no way of knowing. In the absence of knowledge the only sensible position is to admit ignorance and get on with your life without indulging in pointless speculation.

            As for beings outside the universe: we have no knowledge of such a place, therefore assuming it exists is jumping to conclusions without any kind of justification. There is no reason to believe such a place exists therefore speculating about what might inhabit it if it does is a total waste of time.

            Obsession with such ideas is the true sickness of the brain. Believing that because you believe something it must be true is narcissistic psychosis of the most acute kind. Unsupported belief is what should be classified as mental illness. And Christians are among the most severely affected cases.

          • Cressida de Nova

            You have labelled yourself an atheist when in fact you are an agnostic .An agnostic admits to a possibility that a superior force may exist outside the human realm.

          • Linus

            The labels are yours and it doesn’t surprise me that you would imperiously decide what I should be called. Christians are autocrats after all. They get to decide everything by divine right.

            Call me an Agnostic if you like. I prefer the term Atheist because that is what I am given the current state of my knowledge.

            Things may exist that I know nothing about, but the sky pixie referred to in your bible clearly does not. If he did and was as obsessed with us as the stories claim, we’d have evidence of his existence. He’d make a bit more of an effort to be seen. Lobbing one raggedy messiah at us every couple of thousand years and then doing bugger all in between except sitting on his throne somewhere he can’t be seen and wallowing in his own perfection hardly counts as a serious effort to save his beloved but wayward children.

          • Linus

            Call me what you like, but I don’t believe your sky pixie exists.

            We don’t know what, if any, forms of sentience exist beyond the confines of our world. Merely saying “I know god exists” provides evidence of nothing except the self-obsession and willful self-deception of the person saying it.

            You read about god in a book and liked the idea because it meant that the ultimate power in the universe created you to be the special creature you’re convinced you are. He must be just like you because you’re so wonderful, how could he resemble anything else? So a story that places you in control at the centre of creation and responsible only to him must be true.

            Of course the world was created for you. Who else could possibly deserve it?

            Narcissism created religion. Narcissism fuels blind faith. And narcissism certainly provides Catholics with their grim determination to view themselves as humanity’s elect. The chances of any kind of divine being resembling you are so slim, they’re non-existent. How could a divine being be quite so ugly?

          • Anton

            Lighten up, Jack. In a thread about gay matters and gender fluidity I suggest another fluidity because of Pope Francis’ liberalism. If you don’t find it funny then don’t laugh.

          • Jack isn’t sure how he would categorise Pope Francis. He certainly shows “liberalism” when it comes to pastoral accompaniment and meeting sinners where they are. He also places stress on the work of the Holy Spirit above “legalism” and rituals and calls for a flexibility in approach to meet people in the reality and mess of their lives. Unlike many who hide behind him, he seems to Jack orthodox on the major doctrinal flashpoints between “liberals” and “conservatives” in the Church – abortion, contraception, women’s ordination, homosexuality and divorce/remarriage.

            Is this “liberalism”? He’s certainly not a “rigorist”.

          • Darter Noster

            No, but he does seem quite keen on de-centralising the Magisterium, as has been seen with miscellaneous local bishops now deciding to admit to communion more or less anyone they feel like, as sanctioned by AL. That way, liberals can “interpret” Catholic teaching according to “local pastoral imperatives” and we can all move swiftly into the same happy state as the Anglican Communion.

          • We still have clear and unchanging Catholic doctrine, regardless of the confusion being spread by Francis. AL is sufficiently ambiguous to give cover to those wishing to depart from orthodox Catholics. Let’s be honest, some priests and bishops have been doing this for years.

            As Pope Benedict said in a recent message for the funeral of the late Cardinal Meisner:

            “What struck me particularly me in the last talks with the departed Cardinal was the relaxed cheerfulness, the inner joy, and the confidence he had found. We know that it was difficult for him, the passionate shepherd and pastor, to leave his office, and especially at a time when the Church needs dedicated pastors who resist the dictatorship of the Zeitgeist (spirit of the times), and who resolutely live and think from the Faith. But it moved me all the more that he had learned at this last period of his life to let go and he lived ever more out of the deep certainty that the Lord does not abandon His Church, even if the boat is filled to the point of capsizing.”

            As Catholics, we just need to hold onto the Faith and be confident in the Lord.

          • Cressida de Nova

            I miss Pope Benedict. We need someone of his standing.

          • Indeed. As he said as head of the CDF:

            “In fact, the First Vatican Council had in no way defined the pope as an absolute monarch. On the contrary, it presented him as the guarantor of obedience to the revealed Word. The pope’s authority is bound to the Tradition of faith. … The authority of the pope is not unlimited; it is at the service of Sacred Tradition.”

          • Cressida de Nova

            Pope Francis should have this on his door instead of his latest logo.

          • Are you complaining? Francis wouldn’t like that! You may think Mr M. is over the top, and Jack may agree, but this made Jack chuckle:

            “The most mean-spirited, whining, grumpy, acidic old git that ever became I do not say a Pope, but probably a bishop dares to put such a sign on his door, blessedly oblivious of the way it makes him look exactly like the insufferable, hypocritical ass he is.” https://mundabor.wordpress.com/2017/07/15/francis-blasts-whiners-catholic-world-laughs/

          • Cressida de Nova

            You have forfeited any hope of being nominated as a Papal Knight. Very disrespectful of His Holiness.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Protestants miss Pope Benedict too, he actually believed something, and could be debated against.

          • Cressida de Nova

            ( Falls on the floor in shock) Dominic, you do realise
            that Pope Benedict is a Catholic ! What are these other Protestants going to think. Time to cross back over the river. Jack will arrange a speed boat.

          • len

            Wonder if he’s still got his Nazi uniform?

    • dannybhoy

      Joanna Lumley would be much more fun!

      • Chefofsinners

        As a token white male?

        • dannybhoy

          Who cares?!
          Joanna has much more about her than any number of token white males of the wishy washy sort..

          • bluedog

            Wouldn’t you tire of her politics after five minutes?

          • dannybhoy

            I may sound like a besotted teenager (Danny reddens), but Joanna has personality, brains, humour. style and looks, And on top of that she doesn’t take herself too seriously.
            Who cares about her politics?

          • Dreadnaught

            She’s got scary teeth.

          • dannybhoy

            You’re jealous. I have teeth like Ken Dodd…
            :0)

          • Dreadnaught

            Scary indeed, reminds me of ‘Plug’ out of the Beano.

          • dannybhoy

            My cousin, twice removed.
            (For disturbing the peace..)

          • Anton

            She did a good job for the gurkhas. And I’ve never seen Ab Fab, by the way.

          • dannybhoy

            I never watched it either, but I saw a few snippets..

          • Cressida de Nova

            Bluedog is a very sophisticated European and knows about these matters. You should be guided by what he says.

          • dannybhoy
          • bluedog

            Now you’re talking. Probably the most brilliant insight yet seen on his Grace’s blog.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Glad you are not fooled by all that breathless gushing !

          • dannybhoy

            She’s an actress, she projects her personality, but at the same time you (at least I) have the feeling that she doesn’t take herself too seriously.
            Actually I hated her character in Absolutely Fabulous..

          • bluedog

            She’s a left-wing activist, like so many in the dramatic arts, and uses the cut-glass accent, the looks and the polished manner to hide her beliefs.

  • Pubcrawler

    It’s a city designed by Escher, every flight of steps goes eternally upwards. Some good pubs, though.

    • Anton

      Escher

      • Pubcrawler

        Yes, already fixed. Bloody predictive text.

    • CliveM

      Some very good pubs.

    • Anton

      And good exercise to get to and from them!

  • IanCad

    Spent a few minutes this AM on YouTube viewing the 2017 London Pride march.

    It would not be a stretch to claim that Lot would feel quite at home had he been transposed from Sodom to our nation’s capital.

    That madness possesses the land is evident by a comment from a YouTube watcher:
    “True love and harmony. What a fantastic celebration of true love and pride. Wish I could have been there with my husband and kids (but I’m in Australia). Our Sydney Pride march is wonderful too.”
    Something’s going to happen – collective insanity always comes to an abrupt halt.

    • David

      The left needs” victims” to promote and “oppressors” to lash out at. By dividing society they gain power – that’s their grim game, although it is disguised as about equality and love, when nothing could be further from the truth.
      Now that same sex ‘marriages are legal they are turning their attention to the next group, the “trans” community. As they have progressed through their list of ‘victims’, the size of the group has shrunk, so we’ve had women, minorities, homosexuals and now trans people. Pretty soon they will run out of groups needed to be promoted. What then ? Probably a big reemphasis on ever stricter and more outrageous demands for the groups that have already ‘benefitted’. At that point it could well be that the public, who have been relatively malleable until now, will throw up their hands in exasperation and say, “no more”. I think we may be approaching that tipping point soon.
      But if the public continue to be prepared to have their minds rearranged then life will become ever more fraught, fractious and divided, which of course is what they want, leading to ultimately the completer destruction of western society.

      • Royinsouthwest

        If intelligent life is discovered in outer space and contact is made and it is by radio then even before our replies to their signals reach them, which would take years depending on how far away their planet was, the Guardian would have concluded that we were oppressing the aliens in some way, e.g. if too many of our messages were written by white, heterosexual males.

        Since the Aliens would be different from us they would obviously set great store by diversity and we should prepare now by setting up a suitably diverse group to decide what to say to Aliens in the event of discovering that we are not alone in the universe.

        • Merchantman

          Social cache in dating an alien will soon become a must do, even if it only lasts days before the laddies are vaporised.

    • Anton

      It’s clear what is going to happen. The other side of this confrontation.

    • And people expose their children to this debauchery.

    • Alien & Stranger

      We stumbled into a Gay Pride event in Trafalgar Square while trying to find our way around central London in 2014. It was an absolute freak show. Not normal. Not natural. A shameless exhibition of human depravity.
      Isaiah 5:20

  • Traveler

    Just leave them to the Muslims so they learn the hard way.

  • HedgehogFive

    The Inspector General seems to have picked up a comment on Pink News:

    Islamic countries used to have a very healthy attitude towards people being gay, its only the last 100 years and Theresa May’s friends in Saudi Arabia spreading radical Islam being gay has been a problem.

    More likely, rent-boys were confined to the margins of society, where interested travellers from the West could find them. (Kenneth Williams, so I am informed, used to travel to Morocco for this reason).

    In such circumstances, both Europe and the Arab World would acquire a very misleading image of each other’s societies.

    • Royinsouthwest

      We used to regard them as decadent and now they regard us in the same way.

    • Anna

      There is some truth in that. In Muslim societies a great deal of covert homosexual activity was the norm.

    • Dreadnaught

      You are not wrong…
      The sexually abused dancing boys of Afghanistan
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11217772

    • Doctor Crackles

      Are you saying that significant numbers of British men with means were pederasts? I guess as access to foreign boys dried up they turned their attention to vulnerable lads here.

    • A healthy attitude to the extent that they used to allow wealthy British homosexuals access to their young boys. Morocco was the usual destination for this. Visitors included a very famous economist and, I understand, a well-known code-cracker.

      • Anton

        I believe that this is known of Keynes but I am not aware that Alan Turing visited North Africa for that or any other reason. There is no mention of it in the very comprehensive biography of him by another gay mathematician, Alan Hodges (nor on Turing’s Wikipedia page).

  • Anton

    Que?

    • CliveM

      Don’t you mean Qué?!

      • Anton

        Yes I did, but I was just going out and in a hurry. Given longer I might have posted Manuel saying it on YouTube.

  • HoratioLordNelson

    If ‘CEMB are banned from marching in next year’s Pride for making people feel “ostracised, discriminated against or humiliated”’, won’t they feel “ostracised, discriminated against or humiliated”? And aren’t gay ex muslims possibly a more opressed group with a stronger case for safe guarded victim status than any other group? You couldn’t make this stuff up. Get popcorn, pull up a seat and watch, this is going to get interesting… because the craven cowardice in the face of the type of real persecution of gays as meted out in your typical islamist extremist society, towards which our authorities creep ever close with every appeasing step, is only going to go one way, as born out by history…

  • The only thing Jack protests about is Christian protestation against the Truth as revealed by the Church.

    • CliveM

      Methinks you doth protest too much.

      • One cannot protest too much about protestants.

  • grandpa1940

    “‘The Prophet is a Puff’?”

    Surely the correct allegation would read “‘The Prophet was a Puff’?

    • Dominic Stockford

      Pedantic, but worthy of me on my best days. Well spotted.

  • len

    God has removed his hand of restraint on humanity and we are truly beginning to see how debased humanity is without God.
    This descent downward can only continue until mankind realises that the ‘freedom’ he so desires has only led him deeper into bondage to sin and death.

  • mollysdad

    “Allah” is the Arabic word for God. No matter that the Muslims use it to refer to their idol, the sodomites suffered no injustice in being silenced on this occasion.

  • Anton

    London Pride is a beer made by Fullers, as (at least) two other contributors here will be aware.

    • Royinsouthwest

      I have London pride growing in my garden. I like the beer too so that’s two types of London pride that it is fine to celebrate.

      • Chefofsinners

        But most of all it is a song by the (very gay) writer/actor Noel Coward.

        • dannybhoy

          Very talented guy Chef, much like yourself..

        • Anton

          Perhaps you might update “Don’t let’s be beastly to the Germans” for the EU’s present situation? And are you aware of this superlative parody?

          • Chefofsinners

            Genius.
            Are you aware that most of Amy Winehouse’s ancestors perished at the siege of Jericho? They didn’t want to go to Rahab.

          • Groan!

          • Dominic Stockford

            “Let’s be really beastly to the Germans…”?

    • dannybhoy

      It’s not bad, but ESB, 1845 and Bengal Lancer are better..

  • Mendulavian

    What is going on here?
    1. Homosexuality is being raised to holiness?
    2. God is being profaned?
    3. Claims that Allah/God/Jesus is gay are just meant to annoy Muslims and Christians?
    My answers are 1. No 2. Yes 3. Probably.
    I regard Gay Pride parades as Gay Profanity parades. Common swearing is the profaning of holy words. There are only two sacred relationships in our lives – that between us and God and that between man and woman. 90% of swear words come from one of those two relationships – the f-word is commonly seen/heard in Gay Profanity parades. We live in a world where mankind profanes holy things and pollutes clean things – I think the Bishop of Liverpool is being unwise in associating himself so closely with Gay Profanity parades which do both of those things.

  • Discrimination or what!

    London’s Muslim only rental market.

    http://progreatbritain.co.uk/2017/07/05/revealed-londons-muslim-rental-market/?utm_source=Mg

    • dannybhoy

      This tells us two things.
      There are Muslim organisations that do not want to assimilate, even if it means defying our laws on equality, and secondly our politicians are afraid to tackle it.

      • We need a ew politicians with some balls.

        • dannybhoy

          But not Ed…

          • NO, definitely not him, he’s had his chips.

            As #Moggmentum gains traction and ‘You can’t Clogg the Mogg’,
            I rather think JRM shows plenty of promise.

          • dannybhoy

            Agreed. He comes across well. And I say that as a life long member of the working clarsses..

    • IanCad

      If the NLMHA are in receipt of any public funds they should be shut down and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

      • They work with the local councils and get funding from the taxpayer. People apply to them through the council.

  • The police really have no reason to remove signs that might cause offence, from a procession the police encourage in the first place, which is held for the sole purpose of causing as much offence as possible.

    • Dominic Stockford

      It was shocking to read of the trouble caused to the Christian prayer-protestors by the marchers. Some were physically abused, some verbally abused, and some posters were ripped from tier hands and destroyed. The police did nothing to stop it, and when a few had to leave to go home the police officer in charge told the rest that they should also go home now, and that they would no longer get any police protection if they didn’t. And they claim this march is about love!

      • You are easily shocked. i mean this nicely, Dominic: Please grow up.

        The British civilisation into which you and I were born has already crumbled. The country fit for heroes is no more. The country for heroes like my dad, that is, who reasoned that “Hitler had to be stopped”, and made huge sacrifices to that one tiny meme.

        Whinging that it’s not fair, won’t get our country back. It wasn’t our neglect of whinging that caused our country to be lost in the first place.

        The police will usually do nothing, because they are led by those whom the good people of Westboro Baptist Church might call “fag enablers”.

        Grow up. Transcend, “It’s not fair.” Even our enemies know that they are being unfair.
        Ask instead why God has let this happen, now, and how He wants use to counter it.

  • Marty McFuckface

    What a laugh! ISIS would certainly welcome these bum-bandits with a roof toss.

  • Marty The Legend Continues

    I hear ISIS is looking for some roof-tossing contestants.

  • Nathan

    The position taken is that Islam is a vulnerable minority faith and Christianity is a bullying imperialistic oppressor. This narrative runs throughout the discourse of the modern progressive and is a hangover from the racism of a few decades ago. Taken from that perspective you can see why the police would protect one and not the other.