David Coburn MEP on “Equality Nazis” and Equal Marriage

 

“What you’re doing with the gay marriage issue is you’re rubbing people’s noses in the dirt. Everyone had agreed and been quite happy with the idea of civil partnership, it was all bedded in and people were happy with it, they got used to the idea,” he said.

“But when you go across the road to pick a fight with someone of faith, that’s not got anything to do with it, that’s the equality Nazis trying to give Christianity a jolly good kicking. You know it, I know it, we all know it – it’s false bollocks, the lot of it.”

UKIP MEP David Coburn there. Yes a gay man that cannot recognise that maybe other gay people wanted their relationship to have the same legal recognition as others.

It gets worse:

Meanwhile, Coburn, who has been in a relationship for more than 30 years, said that the efforts of the “militant equality lobby” to see gay marriage passed into law have sparked more homophobia.

“For one word, ‘marriage’, it doesn’t mean that much,” he lamented. “It’s just for some queen who wants to dress up in a bridal frock and in a big moustache and dance up the aisle to the Village People, quite frankly if that’s the cost of upsetting a hell of a lot of people, then I don’t think it’s a price worth paying.”

Welcome to UKIP, the party in the UK that want to “get their country back.” Or rather, in the name of other’s religious freedom and crass stereotypes, have a bash at gays who want to celebrate life while not giving a damn if it offends anyone that thinks they should burn in hell. The past is a foreign country and it should remain alien to us for reasons history makes all too clear. Governments and judicial systems that hounded Alan Turning and Oscar Wilde to their graves.

That is not getting our country back. It is a return to the love that dare not speak its name. Anyone arguing that we must not upset the religiously bigoted, clearly needs no lesson in talking bollocks. When we speak of citizens being equal, the prejudicial being upset is a price worth paying.

The cost of not doing so is far worse.

Quotes from Huffington Post.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

GOP candidate: Stoning Homosexuals, No Problem It’s In The Bible

Tea Party state House candidate Scott Esk clarified his thinking recently when asked why he felt homosexuality was worthy of capital punishment:

That was done in the Old Testament under a law that came directly from God and in that time there it was totally just. It came directly from God. I have no plans to reinstitute that in Oklahoma law. I do have some very huge moral misgivings about those kinds of sins.

His original posts on a Facebook last year were:

That [stoning gay people to death] goes against some parts of libertarianism, I realize, and I’m largely libertarian, but ignoring as a nation things that are worthy of death is very remiss.

At the time stating:

I never said I would author legislation to put homosexuals to death, but I didn’t have a problem with it.

 

On his campaign website he states:

I am running for HD91 because I believe in the principles that made our state and nation great and unique in history – and I want to protect those principles. I believe that rights come from God – not from government – and that it should be limited, its taxes and spending should be low, its regulations few, and its protection of our liberties constant.

Our rights are not dependent on the writings, whether holy or constitutional, of people long since dead. They depend on the thinking of the living.

Dear Oklahoma please do not vote for a brain dead candidate.

Source of Facebook quotes Slate

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

Archbishop: Gay Stance Seen As Like Racism By Young People

There are many reasons why I am against the Church of England, and take a much harder line than apologists for it.

“We have seen changes in the idea about sexuality, sexual behaviour,” he said. “We have to face the fact that the vast majority of people under 35 not only think that what we’re saying is incomprehensible but also think that we’re plain wrong and wicked and equate it to racism and other forms of gross injustice. We have to be real about that. [Independent]”

So said Archbishop Welby.

Yes, and that is why I will continue to call for the Church of England to be disestablished, and your bishops cast out of the upper voting chamber of the House of Lords.

You represent a bygone age of repression and cruelty.

He said: “The [Equal Marriage] Bill was clearly, quite rightly, trying to deal with issues of lby homophobia in our society and … the Church has not been good at dealing with homophobia … in fact we have, at times, as God’s people, in various places, really implicitly or even explicitly supported it. [Daily Telegraph]

You do not represent the values and aspirations of the young who see sexual orientation discrimination as nothing more than an excuse to persecute and belittle others.

One day my generation will be old and grey. That day cannot come fast enough. Either you will adapt or be sidelined by us.

“I’m continuing to think and listen very carefully as to how in our society today we respond to what is the most rapid cultural change in this area that there has been, well, I don’t know if ever, but for a very long time,” he said. [Daily Telegraph]

If you are listening, for the love of god, go.

Related Posts:

Former Archbishop on Equal Marriage

Church of England and Faith Schools

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

Clarifying My James Kirchick Post

Some have asked why the cross post for “James Kirchick Takes On Russia Today” was removed from Harry’s Place. As my clarification comments are no longer visible I thought would summarise them here.

I was amazed how people jumped to conclusions about the post – and indeed my own sexuality or attitudes. Simply stating if he had stuck to two minutes, and talked about specifics of what is happening in Russia it would have been better – seemed to be misconstrued as a personal homophobic or alternatively “queen V queen” assault.

That people had two polar responses to my post suggests it was never going to have the fair hearing of what was actually said.

Shame some had not read this post of mine tackling homophobia.

Or this one praising James Kirchick defending Christopher Hitchens.

Or others like challenging Mehdi Hasan on Gay rights and attitudes for Muslims.

People filled in the gaps about motivation, who I am as a person, and in some cases wrong impression what the post was about. Still, that happens when blogging.

Having shown “Russia Today” coverage in the post, and agreed serious issues in Russia because of government attitudes to gay people – and issues in some UK schools too that must not be forgotten – seems incredible some thought I was disagreeing or belittling him.

Someone mentored by Hitchens should have done better. He would have quoted government officials like the sports minister, he would have said the names of journalists murdered in Russia.

Above all Hitch would not have hijacked the show with a non stop rant because that would be the story – not what he said.

Laws are not the only thing that need changing. Attitudes on the street too. That was my problem – I think this made people feel good. My post was trying to prick that bubble of euphoria – much to be done still.

So please, if you were moved by Kirchick’s stand then get involved in showing solidarity with gay, lesbian, bi sexual and transgender people not just in Russia.

EDIT: Section 28

I have been reminded some were claiming I was comparing Russia’s anti-gay legislation with section 28.

Absolutely not – where I mention it I make very clear a journalist in the second featured video (on Russia Today) and quote Peter Tatchell making, to a lesser extent than the journalist, the comparison. As you can see in the extract below:

In the second video above what is happening in Russia is compared to Section 28 in the UK about banning the promotion of homosexuality in school. In 2003 it was repealed by a Labour Government.

However, only yesterday The Independent reported:

Campaigners have identified more than 40 schools across the country that stress in their sex-education guidelines that governors will not allow teachers to “promote” homosexuality, or are ambiguous on the issue.

…

The campaigner Peter Tatchell said: “This is spookily similar to Section 28 in Britain and the new anti-gay law in Russia. These schools are abusing their new freedoms to pressure teachers to teach gay issues in a way that will discourage them from saying anything positive that could be construed as ‘promotion’.”

UPDATE: Mic Wright: Russia might not be the worst place to be gay, but that shouldn’t mean ignoring Putin’s bigotry is spot on with the details of what is happening in Russia.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

New Jersey Ban Conversion Therapy

The New Jersey law banning conversion therapy is one step in the right direction of protecting children from abuse. It will undoubtedly be challenged by those who think that kids are parental property and not human beings entitled to bodily integrity. Hopefully, though, it will serve as a model for future legislation protecting the most basic rights of children – and hopefully, the peddlers of “religious freedom” as cover for misogyny, homophobia and abuse will eventually see their shtick uncovered. [The Guardian: Comment is Free]

As I said on a previous post on conversion therapy, on which to clarify mean choices about seeking counselling:

This begs the question how a minor would act as a client asking for “help”. If we accept that a child is making sense of the world, ideology, culture and religious upbringing, it seems more plausible that somebody else is attempting to impose their views on a child’s development.

Rather than a healthy development to adulthood this is about conversion – not just about altering but ensuring a set outcome. A child does not have the same ability to stop treatment if the parents and therapist agree that homosexuality is wrong.

The article goes on to say civil rights groups support conversion therapy for children, but does not mention them. It states that people that want to change their sexuality should be able to seek the sort of help they want.

Again though adults can make choices, but the issue is how should adults make them on their children, and on what basis think such “therapy” is necessary?

…

Children should not be labeled with their parents religion. Equally this applies to sexual orientation. With no studies to suggest what harm such interventions may have, or a medical reason for allowing such interventions, minors need to be protected from these practises.

Which are nothing short of quackery for homophobic parents.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog