Sunday, June 17, 2012

Happy Progenitor A’s Day!

From the Coalition for Marriage:

Dear marriage supporter,

When Spain redefined marriage the Spanish Government rewrote birth certificates, removing the words “father and mother” and replacing them with “progenitor A and progenitor B”.

So, this Father’s Day weekend, we have placed adverts on 13 websites wishing Britain “Happy Progenitor A’s Day”, and asking: “what will they change next?”

It’s no joke. Those calling for marriage to be redefined have already said the words “husband and wife” should be stripped out of matrimonial law.

Words matter because truth matters. You and 550,000 others want to keep the true meaning of marriage. More and more people are joining in the campaign every day.

The C4M campaign rolls on. The petition continues to grow daily, and it will remain open. We will not rest nor will we waver in our defence of marriage. Our campaign will continue into the months and years ahead.

The Home Office’s consultation on redefining marriage has now closed. Thanks to all of you who sent a response. It looks like it could be the largest response in British Government history.

Please continue to stand with us, and together we can keep the true meaning of marriage.

232 Comments:

Blogger Jae Kay said...

And exactly how many Spanish kids now call their mother and father "Progenitor A and Progenitor B"? I'll hazard a guess that it is somewhere near zero. This is a non-issue.

17 June 2012 at 10:28  
Blogger Flossie said...

I strongly object to being 'Progenitor B'. I think I should be 'Progenitor A'. After all, I was the one who actually popped the sprogs.

My hubby disagrees. He thinks he should be Progenitor A. This has caused discord in our household. We were quite happy before I got relegated to the second division.

17 June 2012 at 10:52  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

If its a non- issue why did they remove the terms on the birth certificates? Can I suggest you read the article and discover why words matter.

17 June 2012 at 10:52  
Blogger bluedog said...

Your communicant is confused, Your Grace.

The words mother and father, husband and wife are gender descriptive but imply no primacy in either case. Yet the world of equality has granted the man, being a father or husband, the letter A, being the first letter in the alphabet. Poor old mum, she gets the second letter behind her husband. So what has the wife done to be relegated in this way?

Even in the case of same sex couples, it would appear under this system of nomenclature one human is less equal than the other.

Obviously this a progressive idea of progress.

17 June 2012 at 11:00  
Blogger bluedog said...

Flossie @ 10.52 - snap.

17 June 2012 at 11:01  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Could do with a Campaign for Common Sense...

17 June 2012 at 12:04  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

I do not at all like the way language and the meaning of words is being distorted to facilitate political correctness.

A child can not physically have two parents of the same gender; therefore for heterosexual couples or homosexual couples to be regarded equally (unless in cases of adoption) the record must show connection with one or the other of whom contributed the egg/s or sperm and that person is the Father or the Mother.

If the other party to the conception is known, it should be stated as such by name or as Biological Mother/Father unknown.

Same gender couples could be registered legally a Biological Parent Father/Mother and 'Recognised Parent' Father/Mother' and named as such according to gender.

There is no need to reduce a child's birth certification to the animalistic Sire/Damme or Progenitor AB status, of a dog pedigree or to introduce any other substitute wordage other than those already carrying universal recognition in terms of gender identity.

There are already same gender couples and parents, so C4M supporters must recognise that fact so far, as a done deed. In the mean time, all children and parents deserve to be afforded the dignity of equality of representation and place in the public record.

17 June 2012 at 12:25  
Blogger Mat said...

Your Grace,
I agree that redefining marriage creates all sorts of complications which, if resolved according to the sole criterion of equality as it is understood by those in favour of gay marriage has grave consequences for families and for children. However, as your communicant is a stickler for accuracy I would like to point out that, while many official forms and documents use the politically correct vocabulary, both forms of my son's Spanish birth certificate refer to his "mother" and "father". I would be interested to know where C4M got their information? Was it once correct but now out of date? Or does it only refer to a particular variation of the birth certificate? Either way, it doesn't do much for the argument...

17 June 2012 at 13:03  
Blogger G. Tingey said...

What "True meaning of marriage"?
Given that the meaning"and definition of "marriage" has changed enormously, even within the confines of the christian churches.

Should a mrriage be with the male in sole charge, and the woman owning no property or rights?
As was the norm in this country for several hundred years?
Or polygamous or plyandrous - as some sects have allowed?
Should children be reagarded as the father's PROPERTY - as was the case in Rome, and early christianity?
Do we REALLY want to follow the exact strict teachings of tha complete bastard, Saul of Tarsus, when it comes to marriage?
Or the even worse ones of the OT?

I suspect the nswer to all of the aboove is "No" ... which means that the definition and meaning of marriage has changed.

Now, make your case, AGAIN please, and try to actually use some logic in your putative argument?

17 June 2012 at 13:55  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Not a happy fellow are you Greg. Coming to in the morning and realising you’re conscious must be hell for you. It is for everyone else...

17 June 2012 at 14:07  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Jae Kay

And exactly how many Spanish kids now call their mother and father "Progenitor A and Progenitor B"? I'll hazard a guess that it is somewhere near zero.

What Spanish kids? Spain's fertility rate currently stands at 1.4. It fell below replacement 30 years ago. This isn't just a fight about words on a form. It's a fight about heteronormative understandings of sex in life and society. It's a fight between autonomy and imposed obligation.

"Progenitors A & B" speak to autonomy. It speaks to a self-defined world of sex that values first and foremost the desires of the self. 'Mother' & 'father' speak to a world of normative heterosexuality where life is built around the natural and essential progression of a man from child to adult to parent. It bounds the desires of the self and drives it into the acceptance socially essential responsibility. Autonomous private individuals are making autonomous private choice that in the aggregate will have devastating public consequences in the very near future. People are trading self-indulgence today for population decline tomorrow. This situation is not sustainable. It cannot last.

The West is searching for a public organization so perfectly constructed that the individual can indulge his autonomous choices without risk. This is especially true in regard to sex. But biology doesn't much care about our desires. And ultimately the state won't either. If private individuals don't voluntarily reverse that trend (and soon) then the government will force them to reverse that trend. The terms 'Mother' and 'father' will return with a vengeance. It's simply a matter of 'by whose hands?' and 'with how much force?'

carl

17 June 2012 at 14:19  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

17 June 2012 at 14:46  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

@carl

so you would advocate a state ordered breeding programme in order to keep the population levels at a sustainable level?

What is to stop the use of 'unatural' means to do this?

17 June 2012 at 14:49  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Alpha

No, I am warning that Europe is creating conditions that must eventually result in either severe national decline or a severe national reaction to reverse the decline. I am not saying these things should happen. I am saying these things will happen. The cost will be personal liberty, and the justification will be 'Liberty has become license.'

Read this. It's the Birth Rates .

Then read this. Du und dein Volk from 1940.

That's what a government can do when it is powered by economic and social crisis. You think it can't happen again?

carl

17 June 2012 at 15:09  
Blogger Simon said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

17 June 2012 at 15:54  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

"Words matter because truth matters."

As all good orators know words define reality and used skillfully redefine it. There's a whole science built on this now - 'Neuro-Linguistic Programming'. Our brains become wired to concepts and we use them to make sense of and define the world we live in.

Change words and you change perceptions and you slowly change the world.

Homosexuality instead of sexual deviancy of a minority becomes a sexy word like 'gay'.

Heterosexuality, instead of being normal becomes a conventional term such as 'straight'.

Marriage, civil law or common-law, is becoming more frequently referred to as a 'partnership'.

'Mum' and 'Dad'., then 'boy' and 'girl', will surely follow suit and some new word to change our conceptual construction of our world will follow.

Words are crucial is social, political and religious struggles.

17 June 2012 at 16:39  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Your Grace,
There is clearly grounds for a prospective equality claim if Progenture 'A' is Male and 'B' is female. Clearly inequality.

17 June 2012 at 16:50  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

There is nothing wrong with a decrease in the population. There is no longer work for much of it, and it will never come back in the way it was once required. There is also no need for any more alien immigration - more trouble than it’s worth...

17 June 2012 at 16:54  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

That's what a government can do when it is powered by economic and social crisis. You think it can't happen again?

Swap 1940's Nazi propaganda for 2012 Calvanist scaremongering? - hmmm...tough choice. I think I'll pass on both thanks.

I followed the other link in respect of birth rate analysis -

...'today’s Mediterranean folly could drive the rest of Europe, and maybe even the world, into yet another catastrophic recession'...
forbes magazine


Taking this on face value it looks as though Spain's to blame for its own mess while the US banking system and it's global monetary magicians are busily sweeping their responsibilities under the the Oval Office rug. Government Sponsored Enterprises appear to have had very little to do with the problems that beset Spain and the rest of Europe, and the likes of FannieMae and FreddieMac and their $5 trillion worth of shit mortgage funny-money didn't affect us at all. Not to mention Merryl Lynch, Bears Sterns, Goldmann Sachs going tits-up with the rest of the reckless agressive lenders who were all backed with FedRes low interest rates policy that didn't affect us either.

carl seems to think that having a family, sized to fit potential income, is proof that a reduced birthrate is wrong and morover an indication of moral decline - I disagree - I would have thought that such prudence is financially, morally and ecologically sound.

The present financial crisis was not solely triggered by corrupt or lazy Europeans nor is it indicative of moral collapse through an excess of sexual liberty; it's more our reaction to the fall-out from the collapse in world confidence in the status of the US's once might dollar.

It's no lucky coincidence that the IMF is based and run from Washington DC.

To assert through presumably psychic powers to foretell Europe's future and at the same time claim the moral high-ground by insinuating that there is a correlation between contraception, no-fault divorce or even gay parenthood (not that he used these exact words - more to his view of personal licence) and today's fiscal chaos is totally disingenuous and frankly, laughable.

17 June 2012 at 16:56  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

carl

I fully agree with your underlying analysis but suspect social anarchy will be the outcome rather than state dictorship - unless Islam steps in.

Who knows? One way or another, in the words of Dylan:

"A Hard Rain's Gonna Fall".

17 June 2012 at 17:11  
Blogger Roy said...

@ G. Tingey

Should children be reagarded as the father's PROPERTY - as was the case in Rome, and early christianity?

What evidence do you have that children were regarded as a father's PROPERTY in early Christianity - come on, give us chapter and verse!

While you are at it perhaps you could also let us know if you think children are the PROPERTY OF THE STATE, as seems to be increasingly the case in this country.

17 June 2012 at 17:11  
Blogger Edward Spalton said...

The perversion of language is the worst perversion of all because it makes honest communication difficult to impossible - as George Orwell predicted with his invention of Newspeak.

It is a sort of cumulative quantitative easing of the truth and should carry a heavy criminal penalty in this life.

As an Etonian, Mr Cameron should know better and, of course, he does.

17 June 2012 at 17:19  
Blogger Anglican said...

There should be an urgent detailed investigation into the insanity virus now sweeping through the ruling elites of the Western world.

17 June 2012 at 17:23  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Man has no ‘goal’ to achieve. Without one he stagnates, as is happening now. We should be aiming for space. Moon bases, that kind of thing, to grasp man’s imagination, even if for nothing else. The cold war killed all that off in the 1970s, through the sheer cost of defence spending. But now we have a new spirit of co-operation. These are not dark times we are in, but listless ones...

17 June 2012 at 17:35  
Blogger gentlemind said...

Roy said @ G. Tingey: While you are at it perhaps you could also let us know if you think children are the PROPERTY OF THE STATE, as seems to be increasingly the case in this country.

Father, Mother, Husband and Wife do not change purely as an exercise in wordplay. The changes are a visible sign of a colossal invisible transfer of power - from the family to the state: The relationship between parent and child is physically real. Children are the property of their parents by dint of this real physical bond. Therefore parenthood is something the state can only recognise.
Marriage accords to the principle of procreation (one man and one woman to create a child). If we introduce homosexuality (as oppose to homosexuals) into marriage, we unlink marriage from procreation. However, marriage is the compound right to "marry and found a family". But if we unlink marriage from procreation and retain the link between marriage and parenthood, we have to legally unlink parenthood from biology. Parenthood then stops being something the state can only recognise (Father and Mother), and becomes something the state can actively dictate (Parents). The autonomy of the family comes from the physical reality of family bonds. That autonomy is smashed by redefining marriage away from the principle of procreation. Nobody will feel the physical bonds being legally broken, but millions of married men and women in England and Wales will have their relationship with their own children downgraded to a status below adoptive parent ("de facto parent"/"legal parent"). This will happen even if not a single same-sex marriage occurs. And this is why states around the world are imposing a redefinition of marriage on their citizens.

It is physically impossible for two people of the same sex to marry. The best we can do is convert everybody's marriage into a Civil Partnership, but rebrand them as Civil Marriages. So...roughly 20 million people will have their marriage changed so that it complies with the rules of a Civil Partnership, while simultaneously having their relationship with their own children legally weakened. Do Sun readers know this? Would somebody like to tell them?

17 June 2012 at 17:49  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Sending a cat to Mars project

Available now. One black and white thing, owned by a lady who sees her future with the creature rather than a chap. Can deliver...

17 June 2012 at 17:51  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

@Carl Jacobs,

When I first joined the diplomatic corps, I was given a briefing paper on humans (most of which I skipped till page 5,667, "human women") and our boffins back home asserted that humans posed little danger to the galactic balance of power- at least for a period of 200 to 300 years, but that the greatest danger to the human race, was erm, the human race. Never did quite understand that. After reading this blog, I see the truth of those words.

17 June 2012 at 17:51  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

@inspector, no you will do more than sent a duck to Mars- the whole of the British nation ends up on Mars by the 2070s- thanks to the leadership of Prime Minister Gove 'The Elder'.

17 June 2012 at 17:53  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Alpha

It was cat and not a duck that the Inspector proposed sending to Mars. Do not give hope to those who disabuse my avitar or I may be forced to change it ... again and again.

17 June 2012 at 17:59  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Spot on Edward Spalton - this desperately needs our attention but while Cameron insists on aping tie-less Blair/Obama and 'CHILLAXING' so much he leaves his daughter at the pub - fat chance.

17 June 2012 at 17:59  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Inspector

She's made a poor choice.

17 June 2012 at 18:01  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

@Dodo,
I am unfamilar with many earther creatures, so I apologise. Does a cat look like you then?

17 June 2012 at 18:09  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Oh, the cat hasn’t come in for it’s food. Have you seen it lately

Not lately, but I know where it is

Where ?

Mars

Oh, I’ll just have to throw my lot in with you then

That’s my girl, you know it makes sense

Or get another cat...

Ah, didn’t plan for that !

17 June 2012 at 18:12  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Alpha

I am a beautiful, graceful creature. Cats are ... well, horrible and smelly. They molt hair, carry diseases and have a reputation for being attached to those with satanic interests.

Len is kept by nine cats!

17 June 2012 at 18:14  
Blogger anna anglican said...

Hi Dodo,

(I assume I am allowed to call you Dodo,lest I accused -as a gay - to be flirting with a man) -personally I like Labradors- in fact I've got two of them. Much more loyal than cats.

17 June 2012 at 18:24  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

@anna, be careful. Credessia de cats will be accusing you of all sorts !

17 June 2012 at 18:59  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Alpha and Anna

Cressida is my friend. Do not take the p*ss. It is unnecessary and unbecoming.

I like labradors too Anna. Wonderfully calm and playful animals as well as loyal and affectionate.

Of course you can call me Dodo - Doodles is reserved.

17 June 2012 at 19:11  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

@Dodo,

Why not? I think Anna Anglican is perhaps one of the least offensive persons on this blog. Credessia offended Anna and took the p out of her. Touche my good cat!

17 June 2012 at 19:37  
Blogger anna anglican said...

Hi Alphy,

Thankyou for your kind words- but it's not worth starting an intergalactic war on my behalf. Creddy flirts with Dodo and thinks I'm doing the same. I would like to say publically that i'm not interested in any of the men on this site and that what comes across as being a "PT" or flirt, is simply me attempting to be a kind individual.

17 June 2012 at 19:47  
Blogger Windsor Tripehound said...

Alpha Draconis, please do us all a favour and grow up.

17 June 2012 at 19:53  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Alpha

I agree Anna comes across as somewhat cute and naive. You have also made known your, er, 'paternal' interest in her too and, as I recall, got knocked back.

Touche you dastardly, scale skinned, randy old lizard.

17 June 2012 at 19:56  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

@Dodo,

I will admit to being 'randy' as you put it. You see Draconis sex-drive is about 1,000 times greater than a human. However, I can reassure you that on this instance, my remarks were Honorable. However, I shall agree to Miss Anglicans request- just stick to your side of the neutral zone!

17 June 2012 at 20:03  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

Windsor - and what interest do you have on this matter, oh tripe? I am 467 of your years of age- how precisely do you wish me to "grow up". You know I was always told an English gentleman defended a ladies honour- what are you a johnny foreigner?

17 June 2012 at 20:06  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

You continue as you are Alpha. This is one ‘games workshop’ that doesn’t close at 5:30

There is occasionally great insight hidden away in that bullshit you post, and the Inspector counts himself among your admirers...

17 June 2012 at 20:12  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Alpha

Well said to the annoying hound, Sir.

However, I shall stick myself where I so desire, you reptilian wrinkly.

17 June 2012 at 20:14  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

@Dodo,

Excellent, I am glad we have reached an understanding, which of course will doubtless be disregarded when our respective interests clash- but I shall leave it to our respective minions to deal with! And who said I would make a terrible diplomat?!

17 June 2012 at 20:23  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

@inspector, why thankyou for the compliment - I also see some gems in your BS.

17 June 2012 at 20:25  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

By the way Alpha, calling someone’s writings ‘bullshit’ is the highest accolade an earthman can give another's literary work. And you are by far the best. Do keep the standard up, because not far behind you, we have Len, DanJ0, Jon, and Blofeld. All bullshitters par excellence but nowhere near what you can produce...

17 June 2012 at 20:26  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

@Inspector,

Of course it is. I would also describe you as a QI'yaH. There is no finer complement in all of the Draconis Empire!

17 June 2012 at 20:32  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

" I also see some gems in your BS" whereas the rest of us can only see BS!!

BS really is in the sphincter of the beholder, is it not.

Ernst S Blofeld.

17 June 2012 at 20:38  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Alpha, thank you. Thoroughly undeserved but accepted all the same...

17 June 2012 at 20:39  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Ah, good evening Blofeld, one sees you’ve managed to get your elderly behind into motion...

17 June 2012 at 20:41  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Ernsty

Good evening.

Let's try not to use words like "sphincter" as we're trying toraise the level of the discussion. Also, you may attract those who have their computers programmed to pick up and respond to key words.

17 June 2012 at 21:04  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Inspector

When called a 'QI'yaH' by a member of our alien friend's race the expected response is : "P'oofTA".

17 June 2012 at 21:09  
Blogger Naomi King said...

God bless Lord Carey and all his supporters in the Coalition for Marriage, just consider where we would be now if it had not been for their brave stand for righteousness !

Jesus’ love creates a delicacy of mind, a discernment of that which is tender and gentle, pure and heavenly— an abhorrence of that which is evil so that the Lord’s redeemed become very connoisseurs in things moral and Divine. Truth is of necessity intolerant of falsehood! Love wars with hate and justice battles with wrong. If there were true Christianity at the helm, neither queen nor prime minister would plan anything but what should be for the Glory of Jesus Christ! Our nobles and leaders would study how to honor Him and to design that which shall minister to the well- being of mankind! Those in authority over us would seek out the heights and depths of Divine Love! And parliamentary eloquence, would no longer be declaiming in the defense of wrong, but would spend her force in the maintenance of peace and righteousness and in the extolling of the Lord!

Great Captain of Salvation you shall achieve the victory! We have compassed this Jericho these many days, but still the walls have not fallen! Up, You mighty man of war, for You are such, and come to the battle and then the battlements of sin will fall. “The Lord is a man of war: Jehovah is His name.” Awake, awake, put on strength, O arm of the Lord! Awake as in the ancient days, in the generations of old! Because of truth and righteousness, ride forth in Your majesty! For peace on earth and glory to God in the highest, come forth in the glory of Your might with the everlasting Gospel, “Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.” The renewed man’s love and hate are both held captive by the power of Divine Grace. He loves Jesus truly and intensely. He hates sin with his whole soul. Indignation is a hard thing to tame, but it is a grand thing to see a man’s anger made the servitor of Christ so that he only grows indignant when he wars with that which is mean, cruel, unjust, un-Christlike! Then he does well to be angry, for his anger is but virtue on fire!

17 June 2012 at 21:13  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Anna,
I have a Labrador Bitch and my son has a Lab dog. They are incredibly affectionate and extremely loyal and devoted. I take both dogs for walk four or five times a week to the local country park. It does me the world of good as well as them.

17 June 2012 at 21:16  
Blogger anna anglican said...

@Doodles,

You are not a Trekkie fan are you?

Alphy- that's quite a good way of dealing with Dodo the menace and Inspector-Nasher!

17 June 2012 at 21:32  
Blogger bluedog said...

Good to hear from you, Ernst @ 20.38. What injustice to compare you to len, jon and DanJO. Urghh!

This communicant greatly admires your posts and thinks the Inspector is completely out of order in his criticsm.

17 June 2012 at 22:37  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

I had a pleasant afternoon watching Euro2012, and there is an important question which I am sure burns in the heart of every subject of Her Majesty, The Queen. Who will they support coming out of Group D - France or Ukraine?

carl

18 June 2012 at 00:06  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

You trollish rascal carl! The real question is what will be a 'respectable' defeat when we face either Spain or Italy?

18 June 2012 at 00:12  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

18 June 2012 at 00:18  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna

For that latest comment you are entitled to receive the special and little known Draconian salute:

'GTsTfD'

It is traditionally accompanied by an act of 'mooning' from a doubly incontinent geriatic specially commissioned for the honour. (Someone like Ernsty would be ideal.)

18 June 2012 at 00:22  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Dodo

Moi? A troll? Heaven forfend! I am just an objective observer.

UKR 2 UK 0 I should think.

carl

18 June 2012 at 00:43  
Blogger non mouse said...

Yes, good to hear from you, Ernst. I too enjoy your posts.
I hope you had a Happy Father's Day, also --- you, bluedog, Oswin, len, and all good fathers out there.

18 June 2012 at 00:45  
Blogger non mouse said...

Your Grace: As I've opined before, Deconstructionism is evil. Furthermore, its practitioners learned it at university, so they know well what they do: with much malice aforethought! Glancing at some other thoughts in response to today's post then, I fear I may not be so wrong that the target in our masters' sights is population control, by sundry means.

Of course, deconstruction of language is one of their oldest techniques: it is part of rendering the populace powerless through inarticulacy. And if 'decons' create definitions as they go, then they arbitrate over all meaning. Lewis Carol saw through that one long ago: "When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."*

Even teaching foreign(modern) languages in Primary School moves towards uprooting our English. I started Latin a little early, but that was invaluable: it taught how western language is constructed - and so, how to construct meaning in English. However, it's difficult to learn other languages if you don't understand how your own works.

As they destroy our languages, our ethnicities, our national institutions and, increasingly, our family structures -- these euro-commies indeed move towards eugenics and/or battery-farms: as Huxley warned us in Brave New World; probably courtesy of what he heard among Fabians.

We don't need to ask for their definition of "love" then, do we? Their degradation of the media foists it on us every day.
___________________

So here's a "thank you" to all loving fathers and mothers- and to the language, etymology, and culture that bequeathed us the meanings encompassed by such terms. I include "husband" and "wife" here: for example, "wife" is from the Old English wif, --- or "woman."

Thanks to Your Grace: for your lead in the battle.
____________
*Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There (1871).

18 June 2012 at 01:09  
Blogger Oswin said...

Thank you non mouse, very kind of you. xx


As to the issue at hand: God gave us an assortment of Anglo-Saxon expletives, and two very good fingers!

18 June 2012 at 03:17  
Blogger non mouse said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

18 June 2012 at 04:36  
Blogger non mouse said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

18 June 2012 at 04:45  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Ouch!...do cut your fingernails Oswin:)

18 June 2012 at 04:56  
Blogger non mouse said...

ty Oswin. :)
Deleted my post above as I suspect vulgarity elsewhere.

As you know, I consider our present times the Dark Ages! For me, the Anglo-Saxons were brilliantly enlightening, and I incline to the felicities of Beowulf.

However, Churchill was rather clever . . .

18 June 2012 at 05:35  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

non souris

I incline to the vulgarity of your Anglo Saxon Chaucer "the Wife of Bath".
Read it sometime when you remove your head from that dark place
not predertermined by natural function for the use of ta tete!

Is that how you say sticking your head up your arse in nice English?

18 June 2012 at 06:48  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Perhaps we wouldn't be in this unholy mess if more FATHERS AND MOTHERS had been willing to speak about God and His Holy Laws and our Lord Jesus Christ to their own Children over the last two generations ! It so troubles me when I see the "elders" in churches where their own children have not continued in the faith but rather fallen away from God. Christians we have failed in our duty ! Is it wholly unsurprising that now the role of Father and Mother are being taken away from us ?

Ezekial 3 tells us what happens when we fail to be watchmen and warn. Some of you who never said a word for Christ to your own children, I say there are big drops of soul-blood on your garments! Soul-blood is worse than the blood of the body and you are smeared with it! Can’t you see the spots? Wash them out, I pray you! Oh, you say, it is of no use warning them—they would only laugh at you! But you would lose the blood stains if you did. Their blood would not be required at your hands and, therefore, if you want to be useful, be willing to do unpleasant duties in order to feel, “I have warned them and cleared my soul.”

Homosexual adults come from families (even if they don't make their own) this tragedy didn't come out of nowhere. Reflect on it Christian have YOU done what you were called to do to educate, protect and warn the next generation ?

18 June 2012 at 08:09  
Blogger bluedog said...

Sure did, Naomi @ 08.09. And you?

18 June 2012 at 09:25  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

I feel for you Naomi. It must be awful. I was wondering about the over the top reaction. Now I understand. Mr. King dressing up in all those frocks and high heels for all those years seemed like fun at the time...not such a great idea now,eh Naomi!!!!

18 June 2012 at 10:15  
Blogger bluedog said...

CdeN, mechante.

18 June 2012 at 10:25  
Blogger Jon said...

Hi Naomi, I'm an adult homosexual, and I'm making a family with another man. And I'll allow my kids to decide what faith they want for themselves (if any). Hope that helps you in your quest to copy paste the whole of pink news and bible online onto this blog.

Carl - some friendly advice - it's worth finding out the difference between England and the UK. If you ever visit Scotland or Wales, you'll be lynched for the mistake you made! Of course, in football terms you'll only ever need to know England - Scotland and Wales don't qualify for tournaments often!

18 June 2012 at 12:30  
Blogger Naomi King said...

bluedog said...
Sure did, Naomi @ 08.09. And you?

Yes

18 June 2012 at 12:41  
Blogger Naomi King said...

So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed and many were edified; and those walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, were multiplied. And many believed in the Lord.

18 June 2012 at 12:42  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

"Office of Inspector General said...

Ah, good evening Blofeld, one sees you’ve managed to get your elderly behind into motion...

17 June 2012 20:41"

Dear fellow

After reading your posts, old Ernst literally charges to the commode and has to wait til the crisis has cleared!

"as we're trying to raise the level of the discussion. " Nearly fell off the commode and hurt meself laughing!

Ernst

18 June 2012 at 13:05  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Bluedog and Non Mouse.

That's more like it.

Posts from those of a more gentil and cultured nature and insight. Such a delight. ;0)

Ernst

18 June 2012 at 13:10  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Jon

[I]t's worth finding out the difference between England and the UK.

I would really like to claim I did that on purpose just to pull Dodo's chain, but, alas, I must admit it was a thoughtless and unforgivable error on my part. Mea culpa.

carl

18 June 2012 at 13:51  
Blogger Nick said...

I have a "GB" plate on the back of my car and now I know what it means "Genderless Britain". Does Fuhrer featherstone and her Equality Gestapo think they can influence the way we think through this crass manipulation of the English language? Are they going to arrest everyone who dares to "Mother" or "Father". What the hell do we elect these inadequate brsainless retards for?

18 June 2012 at 15:30  
Blogger Oswin said...

Cressida de Nova @ various of late: do you perhaps have a burr caught in your bustle? 'Chafing' can indeed be wearisome to the sufferer, inducing moments of irritability, spite, and a certain pettiness of spirit, injurious to innocent bystanders.

May I recommend a close inspection of said bustle and, a liberal application of 'Lanacane Anti-chaffing Gel' - available from Boots and all good chemists. Also available on-line.

A simple remedy affording seemingly miraculous results.

18 June 2012 at 15:51  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

I do not care for the level of prurient interest in my bustle hitherto expressed. Kindly direct your attention to religious matters rather than pharmaceutical products.This obsession with burrs in bustles is possibly a result of the practice of sheep fondling ..rampant in villages I believe.In certain circles (even Anglican ones) this practice is still regarded with disdain.

18 June 2012 at 16:35  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Good afternoon Inspector, nice to see you



Good afternoon Madam, new dog, what !

It’s for Danny. It’s his fourteenth birthday. He’s just come out as gay you know

I see, and as typically feckless English parents this doesn’t bother you too much.

That’s right, so long as he’s happy here and now in the immediate, we don’t care.

Let’s hope he doesn’t visit the local gay club, eh. He wouldn’t be able to sit down for a week.

Ah, but he did want a gay dog, but the man at the pound says they’re as rare as hens teeth, if they exist at all…

Yes, that would be right. The nearest equivalent to a gay dog would be a sick puppy. Look. I know someone who has one. Can barely stand up. I’m sure he’d consider a swap.

Oh Inspector, you are such a help. Danny will be delighted

Yes, do pass my best onto your darling princess…

18 June 2012 at 18:37  
Blogger anna anglican said...

@Naomi King,

Your last paragraph is a complete and utter load of rubbish. Parents cannot 'control' what their children are, just as much as they cannot control if their children are born blind. Being gay is no different and to start criticising people like that is just foul.

18 June 2012 at 19:05  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Anna. The gays are getting a bit of stick, but what do you expect, they are in revolt. One looks forward to when SSM is rejected and that will be that for another ten years.

Now would you believe the Inspector is actually ambivalent to gays when they are meek; would even hold their rainbow flag for them while they erect the flagpole. Wouldn’t shake hands with them though, obvious reasons there you know...

18 June 2012 at 19:26  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

carl said ...
"I would really like to claim I did that on purpose just to pull Dodo's chain, but, alas, I must admit it was a thoughtless and unforgivable error on my part. Mea culpa."

I did wonder and was acting on your advice not to insult one's opponent.

Long live the Confederacy!

18 June 2012 at 20:01  
Blogger Naomi King said...

Anna

You overlook that we have duty to rear our children in the love and nurture of the LORD. Proverbs 22 : 6 specifically states "Train up a child in the way he should go ; and when he is old, he will not depart from it". Deuteronomy 6 :5, 7 say "And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul and with all thy might. And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sitteth in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou list down and when thou riseth up". Psalm 78 : 5-7 "He Commanded our fathers, that they should make them known to their children. That the generation to come might know them, even the children which should be born; who should arise and declare to their children. that they might set their hope in God, and not forget the works of God, but keep his commandments". And if you want some New Testament authority Ephesian's 6 : 1 - 3 Children obey your parents in the LORD for this is right. Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise) That it may be well with thee and thou mayest live long on the earth.


And the warning of God is "And might not be as their fathers, a stubborn and rebellious generation; a generation that set not their heart aright, and whose spirit was not steadfast with God." Psalm 78 : 8

18 June 2012 at 20:15  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

crl

Oh, and are Calvaists permitted to watch sport on Sunday, the Lord's Day?

Assuming you don't worship on a Saturday - us Catholics having altered the 10 Commandments and all - or is that Seventh Day Adventists? One gets so confused trying to keep up with all the protestant variants!

18 June 2012 at 20:18  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

*Calvanists*

18 June 2012 at 20:19  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna

Naomie is right, you know. Goes on too much admittedly and a bit too focussed on fire and brimstone, but can't fault her on this point.

18 June 2012 at 20:21  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Jon. I'm an adult homosexual, and I'm making a family with another man.

Good morning Jon and partner, welcome to the Inspector’s adoption agency. Now, good news. We got not one but two ten year olds for you. Bit of a handful though, but you two look like you’re up to it. Let’s say they are in the ‘pre gansta’ stage. Little devils, they can’t wait til they’re eleven and can stay out all night. But we know you two won’t allow that to happen, what ! {INSPECTOR SNORTS}

What do you mean, you were hoping for something normal. For God’s sake man, you’re a queer and so is your partner. What did you expect, a bloody newborn with flaxen hair ? Well, there you are, take or leave it. By the way, don’t get over affectionate together while they can see you. We search them for guns daily, but you know how it is, you can’t take chances. It’s all this gansta rap they listen to on their i-pods. Satan’s music as we all know, but we can’t deny them it. They have rights now, the little blighters.

Right, there you have it. Carry on, and jolly good luck...

18 June 2012 at 20:37  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Inspector

I was wondering if maybe Jon thought babies could be 'made' by two fellows exchanging bodily fluids and then come out of one or other of their bottoms.

Leave him until he decides to pop down to the Fertility Clinic and demand IVF. He'll then demand an Act of Parliament forcing nature to change its ways so he and 'Parent 2' have 'equal rights' with heterosexuals.

18 June 2012 at 21:20  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Dodo, rather think he’s a bit old to still be believing in ‘mud babies’, so it looks like it’s all down to ‘I demand someone gives me a womb, it’s my human right’.

Incidentally, would you say our man wears the pinny in the relationship ?

18 June 2012 at 21:27  
Blogger anna anglican said...

@Naomi (and Dodo),

The verses you site at 20.15 which point to Jewish and Christian teaching of parents loving children and children loving parents,however, what I object to is you using these to justify your final paragraph in your post at 08.09am, which said :

"Homosexual adults come from families (even if they don't make their own) this tragedy didn't come out of nowhere. Reflect on it Christian have YOU done what you were called to do to educate, protect and warn the next generation ?"

As I said in my reply to that, being gay is outside of the control of parents, just like some-one who is born blind. I guess you can start quoting about divine judgements and all that sort of nonesense. And my question to that is which is morally wrong : a parent who loves their children whether they are gay or not or a hetrosexual who ends up becoming a murderer like Assad in Syria or Hitler in Germany?

I would also like to ask Dodo, if he would, as per Mrs King's implication feel like failure if your children had been gay or that you shouldn't have anything to do with them if they were? I know my parents would be proud and loving of me!

18 June 2012 at 21:28  
Blogger anna anglican said...

@Dodo,

already happens-so Jon doesn't need to do anything of the sort- gays can and do have/bring up children.

18 June 2012 at 21:29  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

18 June 2012 at 21:34  
Blogger anna anglican said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

18 June 2012 at 21:36  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Anna, Inspector understands, there are thoughts a proud and right on gay woman would rather not dwell on....

18 June 2012 at 21:39  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna

Truthfully, I would love my child regardless and feel for them and the difficulties they would face in life.

However, I would also be clear that homosexuality was something I could in good faith not support if they chose to act out. I would not welcome any 'partner' or attend any 'marriage' or civil partnership. It would grieve me, but there it is.

And who knows if homosexuality is genetic? Even if it is, one does not have to act upon the disposition.

18 June 2012 at 21:43  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Anna, The Inspector was never blessed with a daughter. But if he had, he would have liked it to be you or someone like you. You’re feisty, gay or whatever...

18 June 2012 at 21:56  
Blogger anna anglican said...

Hi Inspector,

Thats very kind of you to say so!

18 June 2012 at 22:04  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Would you let your hair grow wild and shave off your moustache for her, Inpector?

18 June 2012 at 22:53  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Hi Ania
Why do you call me Credessia?

There is a difference between a moderate and non comitted stance on issues. It is a pity you do not have the intellectual capacity to differentiate between a strong argument and extremism..something I would have thought crucial for your understanding of past history
considering 6 million of your race were annihilated.

I suggest you read Eli Weisenthal and acquaint yourself with the benefit of strong argument and committment to a belief and the disastrous consequences of being non comitted and indifferent. A position that you euphemistically call moderate.

The Anglican Church ( to which you supposedly belong)is suffering the consequences now because of being 'moderate'in fact really a position of non commitment to Christianity.If ssm legislation is passed and the Protestant Churches are required to marry same sex couples it will be interesting to see if they burn down their Churches rather than yield to this ssm (which is considered to be an abomination by Christians) The founder of your Church who paved the way by adopting this church burning tactical strategy found it to be extrememly effective with emphasis on the term extreme.I hope it does not come to this because I predict little resistance.

If you support ssm you cannot be a Christian.The Anglican Church has not made this clear to you or the Prime Minister David Cameron or the vicar who conducts the services which David Cameron attends regularly. You have turned your back on Judaism for a pastiche of Christianity,a papier mache castle built on shifting sands.

19 June 2012 at 05:56  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Correction: I hope it does not come to this because I predict little resistance and certainly not effective enough resistance to prevent ssm services being conducted in the Protestant churches in the future.

19 June 2012 at 06:09  
Blogger William said...

Jon

"I'm an adult homosexual, and I'm making a family with another man.

Who's going to be the mother once the progenitor has pushed the baby down the birth canal? Or are children not supposed to entertain such homophobic notions as needing a mother?

19 June 2012 at 08:33  
Blogger Jon said...

Hi William,

Adoption agencies now consider it best for the child's well being to be aware from as early an age as they can understand, that they came from somewhere else, but that the parents who brought them into the world were unable to care for them properly. Contact plans are arranged so that the child can meet and receive information about and perhaps small gifts from their birth parents (unless there are circumstances which would make that unwise).

We would do our best to adhere to these best practices as they're built on years of experience and empirical evidence from around the world about how kids from difficult backgrounds are affected by the experience of adoption. Unlike yours, Dodo's and the Inspector's inane ramblings which are built on nothing more than your own ignorance.

19 June 2012 at 11:22  
Blogger bluedog said...

Jon @ 11.22, coming from somewhere else is one thing. Indeed it suggests that your path to parenthood is not that chosen by Reg Dwight and David Furness with pooled semen and a rented womb. So far so good. But when the child arrives which of you changes the nappies and feeds it at 2am, or will you hire a nanny to do the messy stuff? further down the track your child will socialise and go to school. At that point your child will discover that other children have real mummies with bosoms who wear skirts and make-up all the time and not just on a night out with the boys. Isn't this going to be very difficult for your child? The bullying your child will get is going to be very hard to deal with. Don't assume it will be a lot of fun like 'Modern Family'. It may not work out like that.

19 June 2012 at 11:53  
Blogger William said...

Yes Jon. The cravings of adopted children and even adults to know (and be loved by) their natural mother and father is well known, but, if anything, that sheds a poor light on your deficient situation where the unique female characteristics of a loving, nurturing maternal carer will not be available.

And of course there's Bluedog's point that by extending your abnormal sexuality to parenthood you won't be doing the child any favours as it grows up.

19 June 2012 at 12:29  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

cressida de nova

Well said that woman.

19 June 2012 at 12:31  
Blogger Jon said...

Bluedog, It may surprise you to hear that lots of kids grow up now with only one parent, and the nuclear family which you think is so prevalent is probably in a minority these days. I'm not saying that's a good thing - I grew up in a nuclear family and enjoyed the experience, but the idea that my kid(s) would be somehow more prone to bullying because they had two dads did worry me initially. I've read the research from around the world again though, and there's actually no evidence that kids with gay or lesbian parents are any more prone to bullying.

What's more kids with two dads do no worse at school than kids from nuclear or single parent families. Kids with two mums actually outperform those with other family structures. Your concern for the kids doesn't extend so far as to recommend only lesbians becoming mums though I assume?!

As to who will deal with the nappies, I suppose that rather depends on the age of the kid we are lucky enough to get. In principle though, it's a responsibility we've shared when babysitting previously, and we have no intention of getting a nanny. I don't understand the point of jumping through so many hoops to outsource our kid(s) to someone else at the end of it.

Also - I think you need to remember that Elton John and David Furnish have still made a baby, and whilst you may have ideological opposition to their having done so, being so un-classy as to dismiss another human life's start in the world doesn't help your argument or make you look like a very nice person.

19 June 2012 at 12:32  
Blogger Jon said...

William, I don't know where you're getting "cravings" from what I wrote. You make it sound like I'm snatching a child from Camelot. I recommend doing some research on the background of kids who are being placed for adoption before commenting.

I've addressed Bluedog directly.

19 June 2012 at 12:35  
Blogger bluedog said...

Jon @ 12.32 said 'Your concern for the kids doesn't extend so far as to recommend only lesbians becoming mums though I assume?!'

Actually I happen to agree with that half-smart proposition. I think two women can bring up boys quite well and obviously can succeed with girls. However I seriously question the ability of one or two men to successfully raise a daughter. Hope I'm wrong for your sake.

Yes, I am sufficiently observant to have noticed that there are one parent families, and they do it tough too. Children of both sexes need role models of both sexes, and there's a lot of self-serving research out there.

You go on to say, 'being so un-classy as to dismiss another human life's start in the world doesn't help your argument or make you look like a very nice person.'

That's possibly the wettest and most naive comment ever addressed to me.

Can I offer some advice?

I don't think you are cut out for parenthood. Or at least practice on a dog first before you inflict yourselves on a human.

19 June 2012 at 13:17  
Blogger William said...

Jon

Why do you think it right to deny your adopted child the opportunity to be loved and nurtured by a maternal carer?

19 June 2012 at 13:26  
Blogger Jon said...

Bluedog, that's fair enough. Don't even bother to google any research (I'm certainly not going to do the job for you). Just rest on your prejudices and dismiss it as self- serving, why don't you. I'd hate to have been your kid - what a sterile environment (apart from all the dog hair) it must have been growing up with you. No room for new thought or emotion...

William - Why do you think it right that a kid be denied the chance of living in a home filled with love just so you can work out your prejudices against gay people?

Jesus must be so proud of you both! What great witnesses you are for the transforming, compassionate love of God!

19 June 2012 at 14:24  
Blogger William said...

Jon

"Why do you think it right that a kid be denied the chance of living in a home filled with love just so you can work out your prejudices against gay people?"

Goodness me. When I said "are children not supposed to entertain such homophobic notions as needing a mother?", I hadn't quite expected you to confirm that it is actually homophobic to imply that a child needs a mother-figure.

Did you know that there has been a lot of research done showing that there is no link between smoking and lung cancer?

Actually mothers and children is something that I have first-hand experience of having once been a child myself and now living with the mother of my children.

19 June 2012 at 15:20  
Blogger gentlemind said...

If the research suggests that two women can raise a child better than one man and one woman, then the research suggests that nature got it wrong...Factor in the huge divorce/dissolution rate among female homosexuals, and you get a better picture. Nature got it right. It always does.

If a child is adopted by two people of the same sex, that child has a 50% chance of being adopted by someone of the same sex as themself, a 100% guarantee of being raised in the absence of one sex, and therefore a 100% guarantee of being raised in a household that does not allow the child to learn how the sexes interact. A child adopted by one man and one woman has a 100% chance of being raised by an adult of the same sex as themself, a 100% guarantee of being raised by an adult of the opposite sex, and therefore a 100% guarantee of being raised in a household that does allow the child to learn how the two sexes interact. Love doesn't triumph over nature. Nature will always reassert itself.

19 June 2012 at 15:28  
Blogger Oswin said...

Cressida @ 05:56 :

''You have turned your back on Judaism for a pastiche of Christianity, a papier mache castle built upon shifting sands.''

Increasingly 'Dodoesque' of late, as others have noted. Had it not been for your trail across the web, in various 'poetry' sites, I'd be tempted to put two and two together and make five (?).

Your views are oftentimes seemingly contrary, and ever shifting (sands?); could it be that your response, at any given time, is motivated more by bile/spleen/personal antipathy/wind-direction, than by considered opinion?

I ask, as others too might wonder, what exactly 'is it' that induces you to periodic, and unprovoked, viciousness? One cannot help but be intrigued...

19 June 2012 at 17:14  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

gentlemind: "and therefore a 100% guarantee of being raised in a household that does not allow the child to learn how the sexes interact."

Assuming the modern, Western way of living without extended family around, that is. In my mother's family, children were often passed around Aunts/Uncles and grandparents for holidays and so on. The advantages there are that not only do children see gender differences but generational differences and differing styles too.

19 June 2012 at 17:24  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Oswin: "Increasingly 'Dodoesque' of late, as others have noted."

The word 'volatile' springs to my mind most of there time there.

19 June 2012 at 17:27  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Witness the "engineer" make his next move in the game of forum chess.

19 June 2012 at 17:56  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

@Oswin

LOL

Surely you are not still brooding over that sheep fondling business.... You used to have a sense of humour.

19 June 2012 at 18:02  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Jon. Also - I think you need to remember that Elton John and David Furnish have still made a baby,

That is perhaps the most ridiculous statement the Inspector has ever seen on this site, and remember this, you managed that over some very stiff competition...

Any doubt that gay people see children merely as an accessory swept away in one sentence...

19 June 2012 at 18:52  
Blogger anna anglican said...

@dodo,

I'd laugh if Carl Jacobs said he came from the Deep South!

19 June 2012 at 19:06  
Blogger anna anglican said...

'Dodoesque' No need for me to reply LOL!

19 June 2012 at 19:08  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...

I am interested in the debate on homosexuality. However, I am not gay so I do find it very easy to condemn and feel pride that here is at least one vice that I have never felt any desire.

However, we all fall short of what God intended for us. I am overweight because I eat too much. (It always amuses me to see fat preachers talk about sin)I do not give enough to the poor. This does not make homosexuality (and certainly not obesity)right with God, but makes me a bit more humble before I condemn others failing to live up to God's plan for them.

Phil

19 June 2012 at 19:15  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...

This may amuse you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kcYv2L3cx8

The point I think they are making is (very amusingly) is our obsession with our right to live our lives as we want. Everybody seems to do this in the west. It is our right to be a ........... and you must accept it or else

Phil

19 June 2012 at 19:18  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Phil

Yes but you don't campaign for the rights of 'fat people', do you?

Just imagine the 'human rights' they could demand!

19 June 2012 at 19:29  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna
'Dodoesque' is a compliment, is it not?

19 June 2012 at 19:31  
Blogger Oswin said...

Cressida @ 18:02 : : nope, a simple observation, is all.

I've decided that I don't much care for the manner in which you treat others. You've always been suitably jolly regarding myself, but I don't assess people on that criteria alone. However, if it contents you to imagine that I have spoken from pique, then feel free to do so.

I have enjoyed much of your wit and repartee, but your random cruelties to others begin to tell.

19 June 2012 at 19:38  
Blogger anna anglican said...

@ Oswin a theme with our Cressida is that she does not like converts - note how despite being a supposed Catholic she can't stand Albert or agree with him because he is a convert. She doesn't like me because she thinks I 'converted' to Christianity . I am not sure why she doesn't like converts- there would be no Roman Church otherwise. Or the Roman Church would be a small cultural- Southern European part of Christianity.

19 June 2012 at 20:03  
Blogger anna anglican said...

Actually Cressida, I thought that I made some valid points and first few lines in you just go and insult me and my supposed lack of intelligence. Insulting some-one (as you have with me at least twice in a big way) shows you can't put an argument together.

In fact your argument is weak. You just state that one can't be a Christian if your gay or agree with ssm if your Christian. You have never attempted to justify this, but write as if it were fact. At least Mrs King can cobble a few bible verses together to try and produce half an argument (if a flawed one).

Also I'm suprised that you would mock the founder of the Church, that is Jesus Christ, if you are a Christian.

19 June 2012 at 20:10  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Oswin I don't much care for your treatment of others with your vicious aside remarks either.Your own behaviour is indicative of your pettiness cruelty and spite..
and I think I have touched a chord that you are not comfortable with i.e. your propensity to fence sit just hurling insults without ever contributing anything of substance to a debate.To be quite honest I'm not interested in your assessment of anything or your opinion of me.

19 June 2012 at 20:13  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Oswin , best go out and dip the sheep old chap...

19 June 2012 at 20:20  
Blogger Oswin said...

DanJo @ 17:27 : according to my own lights, I've endeavoured to be as 'gentlemanly' as possible; as I perceive that you have too, on similar occasions.

You and I don't have many opinions/beliefs in common, but if this blog has taught me anything, it's these two things: one, perhaps I'm not quite so bad a Christian as I'd once imagined (I'm hesitant in saying that) and two, that too many professed 'Christians' need a course in human-decency.

Using myself as a poor, last ditch yard-stick: racist, often intollerant; ego-centric, elitist, snobbish and, frequently given to the view that many people ought to be flogged on a regular basis; I've nevertheless come to the opinion that I'm comparatively mild, even 'liberal' when one takes into account what passes hereabouts as 'discussion'.

None of which makes me feel better about myself, but rather, makes me despair all the more.

19 June 2012 at 20:24  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Truth is not one of your strong points Anna. I have never said you cannot be a Christian and gay.I said you cannot be a Christian and support ssm.There is a difference in these two statements but evidently it is beyond your comprehension to understand the points.The Church you are referring to was not founded by Jesus Christ,it was founded by a promiscuous serial killer and seemingly an establishment very suited to your ilk.

19 June 2012 at 20:25  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Oswin, racist, often intollerant; ego-centric, elitist, snobbish and, frequently given to the view that many people ought to be flogged on a regular basis;

That’s the spirit that made the Empire. Good show that man !

chars !

19 June 2012 at 20:31  
Blogger Oswin said...

Cressida: as we are now 'off the fence' as it were, let me say that you are a 'busted flush' and, I don't need to further venture my opinion of you, or of others like you, as it must now be obvious to all.

If your defence, is to reiterate my argument against you, against me; then don't bother, as it is as obvious, as it is puerile.

And yes, you have 'touched a chord that I am not comfortable with' i.e. it's called 'revulsion'.

19 June 2012 at 20:45  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Glad you mentioned that word "revulsion" Oswin. I note that you were a major player when one of your compatriots was sprouting all that revolting filth about Dodo .You certainly showed your true colours then. None of those descriptions you applied to your self ought to make you feel better. You are as bad as it gets.

19 June 2012 at 20:56  
Blogger anna anglican said...

Hiya Cressida, argumentum ad hominem, doesn't become you.Play the ball, not the girl (if you are able to, or is this your 'strong argument/view theory coming into play?).

Anyways I said the Church, not the Church of England. Also with your rather strange view of history, what was it I said to you the other day about the Huguenots? Also the Spanish-Catholic Conquest of the Americas- all that loot and gold, inquisitions,very Christian eh. And what was your rather garbled reply ? Oh yes calling me a flirt (in the mildest way) or as I would put it politeness, to men, even though you know I'm gay. Very astute.

What about one of your lovely little poems instead?

19 June 2012 at 21:03  
Blogger anna anglican said...

Hiya Cressida, I think that Carl Jacobs (another of your favourite posters) gave Dodo some good advice about how best to debate here. That advise could be take up by yourself mon ami.

19 June 2012 at 21:08  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Anna,I do not know or care if you are gay . I don't think you do either . You are just bereft of any direction
gay/straight/jew/anglican..all over the shop.
Consult a Rabbi. They are usually very intelligent and insightful people.You may need to rethink a few things.

19 June 2012 at 21:18  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Oswin
"DanJo @ 17:27 : according to my own lights, I've endeavoured to be as 'gentlemanly' as possible; as I perceive that you have too, on similar occasions."

Well your own lights are strange ones indeed!

And of course you're 'liberal' - you have no firm views on anything.

cressida de nova
I think Oswin is a kn_b head too. All he ever does is snipe at comments.

He obviously has some sort of an attraction to DanJ0, be it his views, writing style or something else is unclear. It blinds him to his underhanded methods and personal assaults on others.

Interesting that he stores up his worst for you - a defenceless lady clothed for an evening of adventure - the swine.

Anna
Let's be honest, someone had to ruffle you proddie girls up.

Some of your stated positions on homosexual marriage are against Biblical truths as understood by orthodox Christians for 2000 years.

You're not saying active homosexuality is consistent with Christianity, surely? State your views!

19 June 2012 at 21:22  
Blogger anna anglican said...

Bonjour Cressida,

Totally wrong as usual; I am gay, but you don't like that fact that I don't fit into your pigeon hole or sterotype. More argumentum ad hominem. Plus your reply is Patronising and Boring!

19 June 2012 at 21:23  
Blogger bluedog said...

Jon @ 14.24 hissed, 'Jesus must be so proud of you both! What great witnesses you are for the transforming, compassionate love of God!'

Nowhere in my previous comment @ 13.17 did I mention any religion of any description. Yet you had to introduce the topic in those specific terms because your own preconception is that all opponents of homosexual adoption are by definition homophobic bigots and Christians to boot. Believing that helps you protect yourself from the awful truth that you are unlikely to be a successful parent. I'll say it again, two men raising a child, particularly a daughter, is a very risky proposition for the child.

If you were anything less than completely self-centered you wouldn't contemplate your proposed adoption. But then you don't know what you don't know.

Perhaps it's a case of 'everybody's adopting this year, we'd better get on the list or we'll be left out'.

If you feel better hearing from Jesus Christ too, let's start with 'Suffer the little children...', because with you, they will.

Declaration of interest: father of two extremely beautiful and intelligent daughters (plus one son).

19 June 2012 at 21:32  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Well I certainly hope you find it so Anna.Imagine being thought of as entertaining or witty by you...that would be a cause of concern. Well I think it's time you went out to play with the other little girls now and stop bothering the adults.

19 June 2012 at 21:33  
Blogger bluedog said...

Anna @ 21.23, isn't CdeN's insult 'matronising' rather than 'patronising'?

19 June 2012 at 21:35  
Blogger anna anglican said...

Hi Dodo

I think Mr Belfast said in another thread there is only so many times one can debate Europe. Ergo, I would say with this issue.

19 June 2012 at 21:42  
Blogger anna anglican said...

Hi Mr Bluedog- If you want me to be PC, not like you at all!

But Madame Nova is being Patronising, Matronising whatever! See her post at 21.33. Poor old Cressdy doesn't realise that when things get tough, the Jewess get pis*ed!.

19 June 2012 at 21:45  
Blogger bluedog said...

Anna @ 21.35, PC? Moi? Abosolutely not, I was just being pedantic and thinking that the feminine of Patronising was possibly Matronising. No big deal.

19 June 2012 at 22:13  
Blogger anna anglican said...

Oh no worries Mr Bluedog, I always find your posts illuminating and interesting- even if I don't always agree with your conclusions.

19 June 2012 at 22:16  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna
Not seeking a debate so much as clarity about your position.

bluedog
Will one be able to say 'patronising' or 'matronising' in the new world order? What will it be? Progenitorising?

19 June 2012 at 22:17  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna said ...

"Play the ball, not the girl"

Is that a statement of future intent?

19 June 2012 at 22:21  
Blogger anna anglican said...

@Dodo,

You know my position- I'm in favour of SSM, I'm gay/lesbian and a Jewish -Anglican Christian.

I'm not so sure about the whole issue of Churches doing SSM. But that's not what our government is proposing, so not really a big issue. That is just a big red herring put around by yourself and big wigs in the Church (for whatever reason).

Hope that provides clarity.

19 June 2012 at 22:24  
Blogger anna anglican said...

Hi Dodo @22.21

LOL!

No its you being a silly Doddles, who is trying to defend his fellow friend as she's stormed off in a huff.

19 June 2012 at 22:29  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

@Nova,

If you think what you write is any way shape or form as being "entertaining or witty " then it is ineed a cause of concern- for the whole human race!


I freely admit my posts are in sutle jest or off the wall. But you do for the jugular; in fact when I look at the latest comments from you, I will say I was more impressed by the contents of my hankerchief the last time I blew my nose. I have to say the Anna Anglican is taking your insults better than I would.

Also- what are your wearing in that picture. It makes you look like a giant Christmas pudding?

19 June 2012 at 22:40  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna
It provides clarity on your position, certainly. Not atall consistent with Christianity, but clear. And you need to become informed about the social and legal implications of homosexual marriage should it ever achieve 'equality' with legitimate marriage.

As for Cressida, from what I know of her she is unlikely to have stormed off in a huff. Maybe she's composing a poem for you. If so, be warned, it in unlikely to be a love sonnet.

19 June 2012 at 22:43  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Alpha

Are you crossing the 'neutral zone'? I know you have 'feelings' for Anna but do try to contain them.

19 June 2012 at 22:47  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Ps
Do lizards have balls?

19 June 2012 at 22:48  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

@Dodo,

Negative. More like a mobilisation of the 4th fleet- Nova is one hell of a cruel woman. What do you see in her, btw?

Also, Why do you want to know about my balls ? Are you a secret gay?

19 June 2012 at 22:54  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna

Following extensive research I must advise you of the following:

Male lizards keep their testicles tucked inside their body so it can be hard to know if a lizard is a male or a female.

- being a lesbian you need to keep the potential for deception in mind.

When a male lizard spots a female that he wants to mate with he will go to her from the side rather than mounting himself on top of her. He may dance around in an effort to try to attract her.

- once again, be aware of the side-ways assault and the dancing to confuse you.

When the male lizard is close enough to the female lizard he will then take hold of her by biting her on the neck. He will then be able to hook onto her with his hemipene hooks. After this he will ejaculate his sperm through his penis and hemipenes and into the female lizard.

- all very primitive and brutal.

19 June 2012 at 22:57  
Blogger anna anglican said...

Hi Dodo

Your being a silly oaf you know.

19 June 2012 at 23:01  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Alpha - like me, cressida hates the hypocrisy and luke warm nature of many protestants. Why notfire them up with some home truths? And has she said anything "hateful"? I don't think so but then I face the same accusations too.

Many of the protestants on here only get animated when it comes to criticising Catholicism. They 'love' Catholics, you understand, just loath the faith we follow!

Many bang on endlessly about hell fire and brimstone too. That, or they adopt the 'liberal' view that Jesus loves you and anything you do is cool.

What's wrong with taking the gloves off?

19 June 2012 at 23:07  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna

I thought the mating habits of lizards quite interesting, actually.

19 June 2012 at 23:11  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

Dodo-

Now I understand why you didn't take a blind bit of notice of Carl Jacob's honest advise last week. And you- and your colleagues- are worst for not heeding such advise.

19 June 2012 at 23:45  
Blogger anna anglican said...

Your Grace,

I've re-read Dodo's post about the reptiles.

I think his suggestion or inuendo that I would have sex with a reptile to be utterly disgusting. He really have gone to new lows on this one and it is quite sick. I am utterly gobsmacked. Totally and utterly reprehensible.

19 June 2012 at 23:49  
Blogger Lord Lavendon said...

Dodo

If the faith you follow is being rude to a young lady then shame on that faith, although one suspects the very faith you seek to defend is the ultimate looser here. If you didn't personalise issues then people might actually like you or at least respect your position.

I have to say that despite my own conservative views on gay marriage, I have often read the debates and have been rooting for Danjo to win. That is the ultimate effect of your childish -rude- crude posts to people who are fair minded and don't see debate in the same way that you do.

Although I can see that neither you or you friend (lover? misress?.. who knows) probably do not have the good breeding or standing to appreciate what that would mean anyway. In fact sir, I would like to think that I speak for several people here to go so far as to say that you are without any self awareness and will one day get the thorough thrashing that is commesurate with your antics on this blog.

Until that day,

Yours

Henry Samuel Solomon Kavanagh.

20 June 2012 at 00:13  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Mr Kavanagh

You and your daughter are being absolutely ridiculous!

Are you seriosly suggesting my 'warning' to her about lizards was anything other that jesting? If so, it is you who have the problem!

As for homosexual marrriage, Sir, you views are unstated and that speaks Volumes about you and your beliefs. If you wished to influence the course of discussion then join in rather than abstain.

And married Catholics, who are true to their God, do not have "lovers" or "Mistresses", Sir. That is something more traditional to Anglicanism given the foundation of your church.

20 June 2012 at 00:27  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna said ...

"I think his suggestion or inuendo that I would have sex with a reptile to be utterly disgusting."

I suggested nothing of the sort, you silly girl!

Rather than run off sobbing to Daddy for protection and reporting me to our host as being "utterly reprehensible", I suggest you read what's written, in its context, and use your brain a bit.

20 June 2012 at 01:47  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Alpha

I'm not trying to "win friends" on here. Amd as carlhas pointed out, people do not change their minds because of blog discussions. All we do is repeat and rehearse the same points over and over.

The issue of homosexual marriage is perhaps the defining question of our generation. The arguments have all been laid out and many are blindly going along with the liberal, 'human rights' prsentation of the case including professed Christians and Church leaders.

This normalisation of the unnatural, disordered and sinful, and redefining marriage to affirm it, is, so far as I'm concerned, the ultimate sacrilege against God. It goes to the very heart of who we are as creatures. For Church leaders to collude with it and for Christians to resist condemning it, is scandalous. And for Christians carrying the cross of homosexuality to seek to justify acting upon it from Scripture, is outrageous.

Society and its future health rests on the strength of the family and upon the sanctity of marriage. All else flows from it.

20 June 2012 at 02:24  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Anna Anglican

I am not from the Deep South. I was born in the state of Illinois (Midwest). Most of my ancestors arrived in the states after the Civil War, but I do have one Great Uncle (brother of my Great Grandmother) who fought in the War. In addition, I spent some years as a Civil War re-enactor. Dodo touches on a subject near to my heart.

carl

First Sgt
Company G
24th Iowa Volunteers

20 June 2012 at 02:29  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

btw Dodo ...

I believe you think you have tried to do what I suggested you do. But I don't think you have quite grasped what I said to you. Here is a good example.

You and your daughter are being absolutely ridiculous!

If you offend someone with a crude display of sexual innuendo (and that is a good description for your 'jest') it's better for you to apologize than to blame them for being offended. Especially when you make that crude jest to a woman. If I was her father, I would have been offended as well, and I knew you were joking.

You won't change the minds of those who post here. People who are willing to put their ideas forth in public to be challenged aren't likely to be easily swayed. But you have no idea the impact you have on the silent reader. That's why I always challenge OIG on race. I don't do it for him. I do it for the silent reader. Please don't forget him. He is always here.

carl

20 June 2012 at 02:45  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

carl

The "offense" arose because:

"I think his suggestion or inuendo that I would have sex with a reptile to be utterly disgusting."

I suggested nothing of the sort and to think so is ridiculous! I was warning her of the possible approaches from an amorous alien lizard who's avitar boasts of his sexual prowess. The 'innuendo' was one of naivety, not immorality.

Besides, who has sex with a lizard for God's sake? Get real!

20 June 2012 at 03:22  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Dodo

You had no business introducing the subject of 'lizard sex' in the first place. You were making obvious innuendos about Alpha's personae making sexual advances on Anna. Why would you do that? Why sexualize the conversation? It added nothing and provided great potential for offense. Potential that was promptly realized. There are some things you just shouldn't do - especially across gender lines, and absolutely especially across gender lines with women you don't know all that well. Sexualizing a conversation is near the top of the list.

These are the things you just shouldn't do. Don't call Oswin a knob head. That's an insult. Don't call Anna and her father ridiculous for being offended by your crude humor. That's an insult. Don't ask if "lizards have balls." It's crude and vulgar and adds nothing but further evidence against you. Don't drop vague unsubstantiated assertions about Oswin being 'attracted to DanJ0.' That's a way of implying something without actually saying it out loud. You don't know the first thing about his private life.

Dodo, I could go through virtually any thread on which you post and come up with a similar list. You come across as crude and vulgar, and quick to substitute an insult for argument. If you don't stop this kind of behavior, you are going to reduce yourself to a caricature - the court jester on Cranmer's blog. It's fixable, Dodo, but you must stop doing what you are doing. You need to pay attention to your behavior and stop acting on habit. Too many people are telling you the same thing to simply dismiss it like this.

carl

20 June 2012 at 03:59  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Dodo I apologise for not being here to support you. Sleep is a consideration in my life.

I think the most illuminating thing to come out of this is that
some Protestants on this site will support ssm , any form of virulent filthy insult and indecent unchiristian behaviour as long as it is a weapon that can be aimed at a Catholic,particularly you.

What is most resented by Anna is that I as a Catholic was the only one to defend the homosexuals against the attack on them by Mrs King whom Anna called 'foul' and who now sides with out of expedience.

I have raised my head above the parapet and of course expected the inevitable result.It seems that it is OK for eveyone to hurl vile insults at everyone else as long as they are not Catholics (you or me)

So throw caution or any refinement or decent behaviour to the wind because it would be wasted on the contents of the Lizard's handkerchief who contaminate this site (as if the Lizard would know what a handkerchief was anyway)

20 June 2012 at 05:59  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "The issue of homosexual marriage is perhaps the defining question of our generation."

Well, to some religionists anyway. I honestly don't think most people care all that much at all. The primary issue at the moment is probably globalisation, which include the current economic crisis, climate change, energy and food supplies, population growth, and so on. Really, when compared to all that, same-sex couples having a wedding kind of pales into insignificance don't you think?

20 June 2012 at 06:22  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

LOL. Hilarious post Dodo about the mating habits of the Lizard and how surprisingly apt. How mindless and captious for anyone to take offence. As you said ..get real..who would have sex with the Lizard when you have the option of a turkey baster.

20 June 2012 at 09:47  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

carl
I will consider your comments. However being the "court jester on Cranmer's blog" isn't something that particularly bothers me. There are others who without trying are far more entertaining than me.

In reviewing my 'offensive' remarks you have, of course, overlooked the equally offensive comments of others.

DanJ0
As a declared athiest, (maybe, possibly) of course you see the preoccupations of the world economy as top priority!

As a Christian, I see the moral foundation of society as all important. Marriage between a man and a woman was the very first ordinance given us by God. The Bible points to Sodom and Gomarrah as the consequence of rebelling against it.

So no, I don't think homosexual marriage is an insignificant issue at all.

cressida de nova
No, I will not " ... throw caution or any refinement or decent behaviour to the wind".

I have my reputation to consider.

20 June 2012 at 11:34  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

So, in summary, you think it's important and so it's the defining question of our generation irrespective of what the majority of our generation might actually think. Right, gotcha.

20 June 2012 at 13:10  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Dodo

In reviewing my 'offensive' remarks you have, of course, overlooked the equally offensive comments of others.

You are right. That's exactly what I did. I did it deliberately, intentionally, and with forethought. Because I have no concern about the behavior of strangers. That's the behavior of a friend, and not the behavior of a persecutor.

carl

20 June 2012 at 13:19  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

DanJ0

No - God has made its importance plain as day throughout Scripture. Dysfunctional families result in Cane and Abel situations and immorality results in social, economic and political chaos.

Whatever the majority might think they think, and that's not exactly clear yet, doesn't detract from the sanctity of marriage whatever secularist might say and the consequences of ignoring God's commands.

Now, I'll expect you'll come back with the standard response - what God do you follow; what evidence is there He exists; liberty of conscience and all the standard arguments.

Bottom line: I believe in God and I believe in His Word. You don't.

20 June 2012 at 15:46  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I expect there's someone, somewhere, who thinks the choice between The Voice and XFactor is the defining question of our generation. There's no accounting for delusion.

20 June 2012 at 17:04  
Blogger anna anglican said...

@Dodo
No - you have no basis for your opinion, have offered no logical arguments, have failed to highlight any harm caused by gay marriage and can't point to any reason, bar prejudice, why gay people should not be allowed to marry.

Gay marriage has been in Spain for a few years now (and in a number of other countries, I believe): no profound impact noted. What IS being noted is the economic crisis, but of course that's something important which WILL have a profound impact.

Other points :

Wouldn't standing up for Biblical Christian values involve quite a few others things too?

It says in Deuteronomy 22:28-29, a rape victim must marry her rapist.

In Genesis 38:6-10, it says a woman must marry her dead husband's brother, if he has one.

Numbers 31:1-18 and Deuteronomy 21:11-14 are all about taking young female prisoners of war as wives. Having slaugtered the rest of her family in front of her eyes first, of course.

Exodus 21:4 allows a slave owner to marry two of his slaves to one another. He gets to choose; they don't.

Genesis 16 notes that when a man marries a woman, he gets to own all of her propety (including her slaves) as well.

Solomon had more than 300concubines, many other prophets had at least one. He also had more than 700 wives, as the Bible is pretty hot on polygamy as well.

Even the definitions of the nuclear family (one man and one woman) in the Bible specify that the woman should be subordinate to her husband in all things, that interfaith marriage is forbidden and that any bride who could not prove her virginity should be stoned to death.

Any marriages in the New Testament other than Cana? And all that demonstrates is that Jesus liked a good party.

Also based on the New Testament it seems that homosexuality isn't an issue for Jesus; it's not mentioned in the Gospels at all. I do seem to remember a small part about loving and not judging people but it's probably nothing...

20 June 2012 at 17:08  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna

If you're really interested, have a look at your own Church's submission on the government's consultation on homosexual marriage. It's pretty conclusive and addresses all the points you have raised.

DanJ0

There are also people to spend their lives hopping between Tesco and Sainbury's in search of a bargain.

Go figure!

20 June 2012 at 17:13  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Ps
Anna
Is it worthy and becoming conduct from a professed Christian to tear apart and selectively quote the Word of God in the way you have done?

Far worse than a few personal innuendos I'd say.

20 June 2012 at 17:18  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Carl: "That's the behavior of a friend, and not the behavior of a persecutor."

Oh for heaven'sake, just persecute the little skip rat. No court would convict, even a celestial one. In fact, I bet that Jesus bloke would quite fancy kicking the irritating scratter given half a chance.

20 June 2012 at 18:01  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Dodo. Magnificent bird that your are. Even the Inspector has noted a more ‘devil may care’ attitude from you. Ever since we both battled the degenerate deranged homosexuals on their site. You experienced hand to hand conflict then and tasted blood (...at least we hope that’s what it was..). Perhaps you have yet to come down...

When the Archbishop handed you that scroll, “Most Tedious Communicant”, nobody thought that half the blog would rush to put their names to it. Do take this most humble post as the Inspectors concern for your welfare, and most importantly, your continued existence on this site...

20 June 2012 at 18:53  
Blogger Alpha Draconis said...

Danjo said : "Oh for heaven'sake, just persecute the little skip rat. No court would convict, even a celestial one. In fact, I bet that Jesus bloke would quite fancy kicking the irritating scratter given half a chance."

Indeed.

20 June 2012 at 19:32  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

DanJ0
This just isn't a bandwagon you can crawl onto. Don't you get that?

Inspector
Thank you.

20 June 2012 at 19:32  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Alpha
Jump aboard .... I'm sure DanJ0 will be good company.

Now where's Len and Oswin when you need them?

20 June 2012 at 19:36  
Blogger anna anglican said...

"Is it worthy and becoming conduct from a professed Christian to tear apart and selectively quote the Word of God in the way you have done? "

Er, no actually, you see unlike you I can come up with an argument and justify it. You rely upon generalities,immuendo, personalisation of topics, smut and when challenged get even more insulting, smut and generally foul behaviour.

20 June 2012 at 19:51  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Ah, always good to see a sub space post from one’s friend, the gallant and intrepid Alpha Draconis, captain of the Galactic class heavy battle cruiser - Empire ship “Absolute BS”. This brave alien guides his impressive deep space craft through the vastness of the cosmos, all from the safety of an earthly bedroom, sustained on his long journey only by a curling cheese and onion sandwich provided by the Ensign of the Galley – aka ‘Mum’.

Greetings. One has heard of your most excellent news. You are now fitted with a death ray that can actually fire through the cloak of invisibility. One can only marvel at the technological advancement of your superior race !

Bugger that’s done it, mentioned that awful word ‘race’. Carl will be badgering me all-night now. And what’s this, horror upon horror, have also used ‘superior’ immediately before said word. Likely to spark a diplomatic incident, or worse, Carl grabbing his beaver hat and flintlock !

I say Alpha, room for one more behind that invisibility cloak, and, oh yes, how does this death ray thing work ?

20 June 2012 at 19:56  
Blogger Jon said...

Bluedog "Nowhere in my previous comment @ 13.17 did I mention any religion of any description. Yet you had to introduce the topic in those specific terms because your own preconception is that all opponents of homosexual adoption are by definition homophobic bigots and Christians to boot." I introduced the subject because, in your rantings, you appeared to have forgotten yourself, the religion this blog is ostensibly concerned with, and the love you are supposed to have for your fellow man (and indeed kids who get shunted from pillar to post in the care system). Once again, a Christian on this site shows their true colours and their absence of the "fruits of the spirit"!

"Believing that helps you protect yourself from the awful truth that you are unlikely to be a successful parent. I'll say it again, two men raising a child, particularly a daughter, is a very risky proposition for the child." Fortunately - rather than have to rely on your view, a panel of doctors, social workers, adoptive parents and adopted people will make a decision about our suitability to be adoptive parents. You can commentate from your padded cell all you like - your opinion is irrelevant to me, I'm afraid. I also don't accept that your having been a parent qualifies you in any way as an authority on adoption. It makes you a great authority on your own kids, and I'm pleased for you that they have made you proud.

"If you were anything less than completely self-centered you wouldn't contemplate your proposed adoption. But then you don't know what you don't know. Perhaps it's a case of 'everybody's adopting this year, we'd better get on the list or we'll be left out'." Stereotype much? I could reply with your Church's previous on children's welfare, but I don't need to play the man. You took your eye off the ball ages ago and ran clear out of the stadium!

You and Dodo should perhaps re-read your Galatians and then come back and apologise for your behaviour. You are a disgrace to your God. It would be better for you to tie a millstone around your neck, etc....

20 June 2012 at 20:16  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

The dog that walks on just his hind legs came over to every human, his only desire being acceptance. But one by one they merely smiled or laughed and said “Good boy”...

20 June 2012 at 20:33  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

20 June 2012 at 21:17  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...

Anna Anglican

You said: "Gay marriage has been in Spain for a few years now (and in a number of other countries, I believe): no profound impact noted". It was probably around on the "cities of the plain" for some time also, with no profound impact noted. If there are adverse effects it depends on whether you want to note them or not.

The problem for "noting impact" is that Gay marriage is just one factor, we also have seen over the last few years increasing drug abuse, porn, divorce, alcoholism etc etc etc that makes the task of teasing out the effect of Gay marriage more difficult. I do believe that from the countries that have adopted it we are starting to see some reliable stats emerging.

The Bible verses you quote have been discussed so many times I get tired of refuting them. Please ask yourself did Jesus condone homosexuality anywhere? Before some of us feels smug that that this is not an issue for us, he also hated pride, selfishness and the worship of idols.

Sufficient to say I think at the end of the day we are not God and so have no right to put him in the dock!

Phil

20 June 2012 at 21:24  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Hear hear, Phil Roberts, one does believe you have it !

20 June 2012 at 21:33  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna

If you have followed the debate thus far and actually understand the argument, you will know the Christian case against homosexual marriage. And shame on you if you don't!

It runs far deeper than the wants, needs and 'rights' of individuals. As a Catholic I subscribe to a well documented, comprehensive theology of the human body, sexuality and marriage. Read Humanea Vitae without prejudice and consider the doctrine set forth there. You might also want to consider Blessed John Paul's writings too.

You want to know the Biblical basis for heterosexuality? Read Genesis, and what Jesus did say about marriage and then St Paul. There were alot of things Jesus did not directly condemn. This does not make them acceptable. Similarly, the marriage at Cana has much deeper meaning than Jesus enjoying a "good party". Sad to say, you are also not quite grasping what St Paul was teaching.

You want evidence for the harm of the misuse of the sexual gift from God and the purposes it serves?

Number of worldwide abortions per year:
42 Million
Number of abortions per day:
115,000

Homosexuality and the clamour for equivalence and 'marriage' is, from my perspective, simply a further manifestation of a much deeper and more malign corruption of God's purposes for us and a direct attack on Biblical Christianity.

20 June 2012 at 22:16  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

carl said ...
"That's the behavior of a friend, and not the behavior of a persecutor."

DanJ0 replied ...
"Oh for heaven'sake, just persecute the little skip rat. No court would convict, even a celestial one. In fact, I bet that Jesus bloke would quite fancy kicking the irritating scratter given half a chance."

Does anyone actually see the depravity of this comment by our little 'engineer'?

Jesus was the perfect man and the Son of God. I would willing take a "kicking" from Him. From the author of this? Well, best if I stay silent. This comment demeans Christ. And all to score a few points and rally opposition.

Few takers so far. Only the Lizard who offered an "Indeed".

Indeed, indeed Alpha.

20 June 2012 at 22:31  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older