A message from the alternate universe of Bishop Michael Ingham

Michael Ingham would like us all to believe that African Bishops such as Akinola and Orombi are mere puppets of sinister “elements” in the US that are, for their own nefarious, colonial and probably profit-inspired motives, opposed to sodomy. Such is the miasma currently wafting from the Twilight Zone:

There are definitely those in Africa who believe that the constant references to issues of human sexuality are the hobby horse of a handful of bishops. There are also those who can tell when an African voice delivers a message that has been crafted in the “west.” Many African bishops feel that a few of their colleagues are being used by elements from the United States to continue an American agenda. They are increasingly frustrated by this colonial dynamic.

Advertisement

The Anglican Church of Canada is not obsessed with sex. At all.

Particularly not homosexual sex.

As Bishop John Chapman says:

It may be a hot-button topic in the mainstream media but the issue of human sexuality – including homosexuality – hardly saw the light of day at the gathering in England Feb. 24-26 of six African bishops and five Canadian bishops, including Bishop John Chapman. “We had an initial conversation on human sexuality on the first evening together and that was the last time we talked about it,” said the bishop in a recent Crosstalk interview.

It’s true that Bishop Michael Ingham has a web site dedicated to the subject and John Chapman hit the headlines of the Ottawa Citizen – but that was just a media plot to make him look as if he thinks about little else. The Anglican Church of Canada has a similar problem; this extensive Wikipedia article is clearly part of the same plot.

To show how far the enemies of the ACoC are prepared to go to make it look ridiculous, here is a remarkably lifelike simulacrum of Fred Hiltz describing how he went all the way to the UK to discuss unnatural sex with Rowan Williams. In spite of the patent absurdity of this hoax, it presents conclusive evidence that the concocters of this devious conspiracy have reached a worrying level of technical sophistication. You can see from this video that the counterfeit is almost as dull as the real thing; an astonishing achievement.

Richard Dawkins explains how the gay gene was preserved

Richard Dawkins, in keeping with the contemporary liberal credendum, assumes that there must be a gay gene. In this brief video he struggles valiantly to explain why the gay gene was not selected out of his Darwinian universe; it should have been, since homosexuals would not have reproduced.

His suggested answers are below and appear to have been extracted from the Beano Comic Book of Weird Science:

1. The gay uncle theory: a prehistoric gay equivalent of the eunuch who looks after the females and their offspring while the butch males are out hunting. They passed on gay genes to the children by protecting their relatives’ children who would have carried the gay gene, demonstrating – albeit tenuously -the Darwinian advantage of the protective gay uncle for cavemen; it doesn’t explain the last 6000 years.
2. The gay gene was passed on by homosexuals who had sex with the dominant males’ females on the side; homosexuality was used merely as a cunning ploy to steal other men’s’ women.
3. The gay gene only produces homosexual behaviour given the right social stimulation – such as today. Dawkins almost slips into blasphemy on this one by saying there is no gay gene; he quickly recovers by sputtering that there is a gay gene now even if it once used to be an animal tracking gene which wasn’t allowed to express itself properly. Of course, this leaves the original problem: once the gay gene expresses itself in gay behaviour, homosexuals would be selected out – they don’t seem to have been.

So there you have it: the great high priest of Darwinian Dogma has spoken; all nonsense perhaps, but atheists, please genuflect.

Discrimination in the Gay Softball World Series

Apparently, bisexual men are not gay enough to compete:

Three bisexual men filed a lawsuit in Seattle, Washington against the North American Gay Amateur Athletic Alliance (NAGAAA) claiming they were discriminated against for not being gay enough to participate in the organization’s Gay Softball World Series, The Seattle Times reported Tuesday evening.

Three bisexual men filed a lawsuit in Seattle, Washington against the North American Gay Amateur Athletic Alliance (NAGAAA) claiming they were discriminated against for not being gay enough to participate in the organization’s Gay Softball World Series, The Seattle Times reported Tuesday evening.

The three men who filed the suit, Steven Apilado, LaRon Charles and Jon Russ, claim their softball team, D2, was disqualified from participating in the softball championship because the alliance ruled they were “nongay.”

It’s hard to know what to say about this, other than to note how unfair it is of the NAGAAA to take the wind out the sails of anyone trying to be funnier than them.

Homosexuality a major cause of priestly paedophilia in the church

From Lifesite News:

A must-read paper produced by Human Life International Research Director Brian Clowes has closed the book on the question of whether homosexuality in the priesthood is a root cause of the clerical sexual abuse crisis.  Citing numerous research studies, Clowes demonstrates that homosexuality is strongly linked to sexual abuse of minors, and that celibacy is definitely not a cause of pedophilia.

Clowes cites studies, including:

– Homosexual Alfred Kinsey, the USA’s preeminent sexual researcher, found in 1948 that 37 percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old.

– A recent study published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that “The best epidemiological evidence indicates that only 2.4% of men attracted to adults prefer men.  In contrast, around 25-40% of men attracted to children prefer boys.  Thus, the rate of homosexual attraction is 6-20 times higher among pedophiles.”

– A study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that, “Pedophilia appears to have a greater than chance association with two other statistically infrequent phenomena.  The first of these is homosexuality … Recent surveys estimate the prevalence of homosexuality, among men attracted to adults, in the neighborhood of 2%.  In contrast, the prevalence of homosexuality among pedophiles may be as high as 30-40%.”

– A study in the Journal of Sex Research noted that “… the proportion of sex offenders against male children among homosexual men is substantially larger than the proportion of sex offenders against female children among heterosexual men … the development of pedophilia is more closely linked with homosexuality than with heterosexuality.”

– A study of 229 convicted child molesters published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that “eighty-six percent of [sexual] offenders against males described themselves as homosexual or bisexual.”

If the Roman Catholic church does weed out homosexual priests to protect children, will those howling for blood – the dripping with sanctimony Hitchens-Dawkins conglomerate – applaud or shriek “homophobia”. Let me guess.

Gay day of silence

From here:

Gay Day of Silence a Waste of Tax Dollars, Critics Say.

Thousands of public schools nationwide will allow students affiliated with a gay and lesbian advocacy group to sponsor an anti-bullying “Day of Silence” on Friday, a demonstration some socially conservative family organizations say is a disruptive waste of taxpayer dollars and a reason to keep kids out of school.

GLSEN — the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network — is organizing the 15th annual Day of Silence for April 16, encouraging students to remain mute during classes to call attention to verbal and physical abuse of gay students.

When I read the headline I had high hopes that this was to be a day when homosexuality evangelists would keep quiet, but no.

Peter Tatchell defends Christian’s right to criticise homosexuality

The law in the UK seems to have abandoned common sense:

Gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell has defended a Christian street preacher fined £1,000 for saying that homosexuality is a sin.

Baptist Shawn Holes was taken from a busy shopping street in a police van and locked in a cell for the night.

He appeared in court the next day charged with ‘uttering homophobic remarks’ in a breach of the peace that prosecutors said was ‘aggravated by religious prejudice’.

Last night Mr Tatchell attacked the fine as ‘heavy-handed’ and ‘totally disproportionate’.

He said: ‘The price of freedom of speech is that we sometimes have to put up with opinions that are objectionable and offensive.

‘Just as people should have the right to criticise religion, people of faith should have the right to criticise homosexuality. Only incitements to violence should be illegal.’

Mr Holes, an American preacher who was travelling around Britain with a dozen colleagues, was arrested in Sauchiehall Street, Glasgow, on March 18.

After discussing general Christian topics, the married father-of-two, a former wedding photographer, was fielding questions from the crowd.

When asked about his views on gays, Mr Holes, 47, from Lake Placid in New York State, said he told questioners: ‘Homosexuals deserve the wrath of God – and so do all other sinners – and they are going to a place called Hell.’

A spokesman for the Crown Office – the Scottish prosecution service – said: ‘We take all crimes of prejudice extremely seriously.’

When Peter Tatchell’s view of a Christian repeating what the Bible says about homosexuality is more tolerant than that of the police, it seems fairly obvious that something has gone badly wrong with British justice.

The Scottish prosecution service takes all crimes of prejudice extremely seriously except its own.

Christian B and B couple face legal action for turning away homosexuals

Equality hell in action:

A Christian bed-and-breakfast owner is facing legal action for breaching discrimination laws after turning away a gay couple.

Susanne Wilkinson said it was ‘against her convictions’ to let the couple share a double bed in the home where she lives with her husband and children.

But she was reported to police after refusing a room to Michael Black, 62, and John Morgan, 56.

Mr Morgan said he and Mr Black, who live together in Brampton, Cambridgeshire, were considering suing not for money but ‘for a principle’.

The principle in question appears to be the grinding into oblivion anyone who is not prepared to accept homosexual activity as other than aberrant – and Christians are in the direct line of fire. This isn’t the first instance.

An Anglican/Catholic exchange program

The Times is suggesting that Roman Catholic children might be safer from child rapists in the Anglican Church:

Has the time come for the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, to open the door to the many millions of British Roman Catholic worshippers who may be worried that their children are likely to be interfered with by priests? I think it’s correct that young children are slightly less at risk from the Anglican clergy, although it would be unwise of Rowan to offer any cast-iron promises, just in case.

A reciprocal arrangement could be made with the many Anglican clergy who want a male priest to interfere with them. A perfect arrangement: Anglicans send Rome all their pathicus clergy in exchange for Rome’s children.

UK: Catholic charity wins gay adoption ruling

From the BBC:

A Catholic adoption society has won a High Court battle over laws forcing it to consider gay couples as parents.

Leeds-based Catholic Care had warned it would be forced to give up its work finding homes for children if it had to comply with the legislation.

Its plea to be allowed an exemption was opposed by the Charity Commission.

However, Mr Justice Briggs has allowed Catholic Care’s appeal and ordered the commission to reconsider the case in the light of his judgement.

Predictably, the gay rights group, Stonewall wasn’t too happy:

Jonathan Finney, head of external affairs at Stonewall, said: “It’s unthinkable that anyone engaged in delivering any kind of public or publicly funded service should be given licence to pick and choose service users on the basis of individual prejudice.

“It’s clearly in the best interests of children in care to encourage as wide a pool of potential adopters as possible.”

Is it in the best interests of children to consider placing them with a same-sex couple? Not according to Baroness Deech, family lawyer and chairman of the Bar Standards Board:

Same sex parents are bad for children if they deprive them of the influence of a father or mother, she said.

She warned that gay or lesbian parents cannot be best for the welfare of children if there is no contact with adults of another sex.

Lady Deech spoke of her ‘unease’ about the laws on homosexual couples. The former chief of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority criticised recent laws on in vitro fertilisation that have given new rights to gay partners……

‘There is a wealth of research showing that children need fathers, not just two parents. Children need to see complementary roles, the relationship between the sexes, a microcosm of society, as they grow up.’

Compulsory equality in Ontario classrooms

My grandparents used to say to my parents, “I’m glad I’m not bringing up children in this day and age”; to gain perspective, “this day and age” was when I was young and we had no TV, no car, no telephone, the milk was delivered by horses pulling a cart and we learned to write with a scratchy pen that had to be dipped in an inkwell.

In their turn, my parents said the same thing to me; in the early days, we still had no car or telephone.

Now I look at my grandchildren and say to their parents, “I’m glad I’m not bringing up children in this day and age”.

There are many reasons; here is one:

TORONTO, Ontario, January 7, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Ontario Ministry of Education has mandated that every school board in Ontario, Catholic and public, implement a new equity and inclusiveness policy by September 2010.

While the new initiative was devised with participation from the curriculum arm of the Ontario Bishops’ Assembly, it nevertheless would force Ontario’s Catholic school boards to recognize “sexual orientation” as a ground protected from discrimination.  The Vatican has warned, however, that such a recognition is usually part and parcel with the outright promotion of homosexuality. One prominent Catholic commentator and priest has said that this is indeed the Ministry’s aim.

The Ministry’s new initiative, called the Equity and Inclusive Education Strategy, requires school boards to address areas such as religious accommodation and the prevention of discrimination, which includes combating “homophobia.”

And so it begins

The UK government, under the guise of it’s Equality Mania, has lifted the ban on same-sex marriages in churches. What will happen next?

Traditionalist bishops and peers fear that vicars could be taken to court and accused of discrimination if they turn down requests to hold civil partnerships on religious premises.

Their concerns have been raised following a landmark vote by peers that will allow the ceremonies for same-sex couples to be held in places of worship for the first time.

In the interests of pressing home my advantage, if I were a gay man determined to legitimise my lifestyle, I would organise a series of gay church “marriages” as test cases; and sue the vicars if they refused to comply.

Homosexuals protest that the Roman Catholic Church is too Roman Catholic

From the BBC:

Hundreds of Dutch activists have walked out of a Mass in protest at a Roman Catholic policy of denying communion to practising homosexuals.

On this occasion, the church, in ‘s-Hertogenbosch, had already decided not to serve communion, so the protesters left, shouting and singing.

The dispute began earlier this month when a priest in a nearby town refused communion to an openly gay man.

This dispute began during Dutch carnival celebrations earlier in February, when the man chosen to be carnival prince in nearby Reusel was refused communion because of his open homosexuality.

The refusal offended many in the local community.

Several hundred demonstrators, dressed in pink wigs and clothes, left the church in protest.

The man at the centre of the row has said he just wants equal treatment – if he is regarded as a sinner, he wants the priest to refuse communion to all other sinners too.

The man at the centre of the row, rather than come to the Lord’s table as a penitent sinner, wants to argue with God about his particular sinfulness which, presumably, he thinks is so special that it deserves to be affirmed rather than forgiven. That is equal treatment?

Apple using child labour

Apple’s Steve Jobs believes in trendy causes like equality and fundamental rights and, for that reason, donated $100k to support homosexual marriage in California:

Steve Jobs’ company Apple Inc. released a statement in October 2008 opposing Proposition 8 and donating $100,000 to the No on 8 campaign. Said Apple, “[We] strongly believe that a person’s fundamental rights — including the right to marry — should not be affected by their sexual orientation.”

Oddly enough, until the prospect of bad publicity loomed large, Jobs’ enthusiasm for fundamental rights did not extend to avoiding the use of child labour in the making of iPods and iPhones:

Technology giant Apple has admitted that child labour has been employed at some of the factories that build its iPods, computers and mobile phones.

An audit found that at least eleven 15-year-old children were found to be working in three factories that supply Apple in the last year.

It said that child workers were now no longer being used at the sites, or were no longer underage.

High-tech piety is no match for profit.

Elton John, theologian

Let’s start on a positive note: Elton gets some things right. As the creator of the universe, the Logos, Jesus is quite bright; and Jesus was compassionate and forgiving.

Once Elton moves beyond that, there is just the slightest – the very slightest – chance that he may be allowing his own personal homoerotic perspective cloud his judgement; just a little. After all, why would the Creator of the universe, the One who caused all things to be, the archetype of abundance, who holds everything together through the power of his word, before whom every knee shall bow choose to be incarnate as an example of an evolutionary dead end destined for Darwinian deselection?

In Elton’s own words:

“I think Jesus was a compassionate, super-intelligent gay man who understood human problems,” John told the Sunday supplement. “On the cross, he forgave the people who crucified him. Jesus wanted us to be loving and forgiving. I don’t know what makes people so cruel. Try being a gay woman in the Middle East — you’re as good as dead.”