Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Cameron defends gay marriage because it is 'fair', 'right' and 'popular'

Click to view:

204 Comments:

Blogger FrankFisher said...

All the polls? Bulllllllllshit David.

Oh, and gays and lesbians can marry now - they have that right, they have equality. No one is against gays and lesbians marrying - but what his government wants to do is allow men to marry men, women to marry women. That is not equality, that is rewriting marriage.

Sod you Dave.

30 October 2012 at 17:45  
Blogger William said...

FrankFisher

That's the long and short of it.

30 October 2012 at 19:10  
Blogger John Magee said...

"Fair. right, and popular"? If that's true let the people vote for or against. Let the will of the people speak not the politcally correct politicians.

30 October 2012 at 19:13  
Blogger John Henson said...

Sadly he doesn't realise that it's none of these three.

30 October 2012 at 19:18  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

The letter says it all.

"The State should not stop people getting married unless there are very good reasons - and I sincerely believe being gay, lesbian or bisexual is not one of them."

What is this thing called the State? Do we not have a right to vote on a redefinition of the millenia old term marriage? There's only one Poll that should count. There is no mandate for the Government to implement this.

Cameron should now stop the pretence that he's a Christian or a democrat, he's neither, and the Anglican Church, if it maintains its teachings are biblically based, should excommunicate him.

30 October 2012 at 19:38  
Blogger John Magee said...

Dodo

Excommunicate him? Are you serious?Most of the Anglican Church chain of command agree with him.

30 October 2012 at 19:47  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Surely not, John?! Then they must excommunicate themselves too.

30 October 2012 at 20:14  
Blogger gentlemind said...

The definition of marriage is the definition of parenthood. This is why UDHR, ECHR and ICCPR all give marriage as a compound right: the right to marry and found a family. Only one human relationship can found a family - one man and one woman. Any other definition of marriage gives a false definition of parenthood, thereby giving other relationships the legal right to do the physically impossible. Is this fair? Right?

In order to make legally possible the physically impossible, the state necessarily makes the physically possible legally impossible. Every child loses the right to know and be cared for by their parents. The creation of an artificial right for a minority takes away an established natural right from everybody. This is the only guaranteed outcome of a definition of the legal institution of marriage. For that reason, i have to conclude it is the desired outcome.

30 October 2012 at 20:36  
Blogger Maturecheese said...

Popular? Is he on this planet?

30 October 2012 at 20:51  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Cameron defends gay marriage because it is 'fair', 'right' and 'popular'

My arse ! By the way, so is capital punishment. Any chance of our respected prime minister getting out of the gay bed he finds himself in and ‘bending over’ to get that one through. Might upset the queers though. How can you hang someone with a bottom like that being particularly expected as grounds for appeal...

30 October 2012 at 20:58  
Blogger len said...

With people like Cameron directing the State no wonder our Society and the Anglican Church is in the mess it is in!.There is no moral direction or moral guidance coming from our Government or from our Church.The generation growing up now will accept what is immoral and unrighteous as 'normal' unless those in positions of authority speak out!.

Doesn`t these Bible verse describe exactly the direction our Society is going in?.

'So justice is driven back, and righteousness stands at a distance; truth has stumbled in the streets, honesty cannot enter'.(Isaiah 59:14)

30 October 2012 at 21:26  
Blogger Youthpasta said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFBOQzSk14c

30 October 2012 at 21:35  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

30 October 2012 at 21:39  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Youth Pasta,

What about the Dawes, Tomes,Mousely, Grubbs,Fidelity Fiduciary Bank ? LOL!

30 October 2012 at 21:40  
Blogger Youthpasta said...

Huh?

30 October 2012 at 21:43  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Youth Pasta,

A little joke, when you mentioned Barclays Bank (founded by a Christian Quaker family no less); The Dawes, Tomes,Mousely, Grubbs,Fidelity Fiduciary Bank,which is like how banks were in the old days, is from the scene in 'Mary Poppins' when they try and get the Tuppence...

30 October 2012 at 21:47  
Blogger Youthpasta said...

Other thread, dear, other thread.

Regarding Quakers founding Barclays, that's hardly a ringing endorsement given how much stuff from other religions and society they are happy build in to their beliefs.

Regarding the whole gay marriage thing, I thought this was worth bringing to people's attention:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20140516
Quite clearly here Nadine Dorries says that she is IN FAVOUR of gay marriage. Her only issue with it is the issue with ECHR that would arise.
Wonder if those who have spoken favourably of Dorries in this matter have any thoughts? (Not saying this as any form of brag, as I never said anything previously, but simply curious)

30 October 2012 at 21:53  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Youth Pasta.

Does that mean you don't eat quaker oates? I find Quakers to be a peaceful and respectful version of Christianity. Very nice people actually, who take their faith extremely seriously.

In any case when you said "wrong thread my dear", I thought of Craig Revel Horwood for some reason...

But seriously, if you want a Christian Bank what about Kingdom Bank ('where savings, build Churches') or Reliance Bank (owned by the Salvation Army?). I know that the C of E has an Insurance company called 'Ecclesiastical', but I don't think it has a banking arm.

Hope that helps!

30 October 2012 at 22:07  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Elizabeth II misrule of the Folk Land is a rather unpopular sham to which Cameron is a snot nosed party

30 October 2012 at 22:07  
Blogger Lord Lavendon said...

Dodo,

Alas, The Church of England does not have any specific canons regarding how or why a member can be excommunicated, although it has a canon according to which ecclesiastical burial may be refused to someone "declared excommunicate for some grievous and notorious crime and no man to testify to his repentance"...

30 October 2012 at 22:37  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Lord Lavendon:

So what you're saying is we have to kill the Flashman?

30 October 2012 at 23:38  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

len said ...

"There is no moral direction or moral guidance coming from our Government or from our Church.The generation growing up now will accept what is immoral and unrighteous as 'normal' unless those in positions of authority speak out!"

I do agree with your post.

However, I must point out the Catholic Church take a consistent and biblically based stance on the moral issues of these times. It has clear and unambiguous teaching on abortion, contraception, divorce and homosexuality.

Catholicism firmly holds that a nation can only be strong if the Church is strong and civic society is founded on the ordinances of God. This is, I believe, a biblical position. Its the key to the much criticised 'Two Swords' doctrine. It also lies behind its great social teachings on social justice which tend to be misrepresented by some protestants.

You do have to be a Catholic to agree with the social and moral teachings of the Church. They are worth very serious consideration.

30 October 2012 at 23:49  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Lord Lavendon

I do recall His Nib's referring some time ago to individuals being 'out of communion' with Anglicanism for some theological reason or another. I'm sure it had something to do with Holy Marriage but cannot remember. Perhaps someone better informed might explain.

Where, oh where, is Albert when one needs him?

30 October 2012 at 23:55  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Deary me, what an error!

It should have read:

"You do not have to be a Catholic to agree with the social and moral teachings of the Church. They are worth very serious consideration."

30 October 2012 at 23:58  
Blogger Matt A said...

By the way, if any readers are (like myself) voting in the Corby/East Northants election soon, due to the resignation of the infamous Louise Mensch, then please note that both the Tory and Labour candidates are personally in favour of SSM. I have yet to find out if the UKIP candidate is or not, if anyone has this information, please post it. Thanks.

31 October 2012 at 00:14  
Blogger Lord Lavendon said...

Belfast,

Don't mention Flashman to me - what a bally bounder!

Dodo,

Being the Anglican Church, you will probably find different people with different views, I guess he could be denied Holy Communion perhaps, but how much of a Christian is Cameron anyhow? Does he actually go to Church every week, read the Bible and pray? (the 'basics'?!). I don't know myself, but the answer is probably 'no'. Cameron is just playing politics with this and frankly if he were Roman Catholic he'd probably do the same thing, in so much as Bliar is a Catholic and he introduced us to civil partnerships and the whole equality agenda.

31 October 2012 at 00:44  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

31 October 2012 at 01:25  
Blogger bluedog said...

Obviously Dave has not been told about the plummeting membership of the Conservative Party. Voting with their feet, ex-Conservatives are leaving in protest at Dave's stance on SSM.

And here's the rub. Now that Dave has panicked and seems to have appointed Australian political hit-man Lynton Crosby to help with the 2015 re-election campaign, what if Crosby advises 'Ditch SSM'. After all, both Houses of the Australian parliament voted against private members's bills promoting SSM, as Crosby will no doubt be telling Dave.

Very frequently.

Another U-turn looms in the interests of survival.

But there must come a point when the parliamentary Conservative Party simply says, 'Enough. How many policy stuff-ups do we have to endure?'. The tipping point could well be the inevitable back-flip on SSM which will destroy any remaining vestige of Dave's authority.

Trouble is, messiah Boris hasn't seen the light on SSM either.

31 October 2012 at 07:38  
Blogger Flossie said...

People can see how their MPs are likely to vote on same sex marriage on the Equal Marriage website: http://www.c4em.org.uk/support-for-equal-marriage/

There are currently 275 MPs in favour, and only 78 against.

I am a tad crestfallen about this letter, as my carefully constructed and informative letter to David Cameron elicited the briefest acknowledgement from an underling thanking me for my input!

31 October 2012 at 08:29  
Blogger Nicodemus said...

Well, all I can say is that our secular, corrupt and unbelieving Establishment is on a collision course with Islam.

31 October 2012 at 10:08  
Blogger Preacher said...

The Word of God is clear & easily understandable. He is the creator, King & owner of the Cosmos. His laws are supreme & unalterable. Any King, Emperor, President or Politician who tinkers or alters them, does so at their own risk.

31 October 2012 at 10:24  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

31 October 2012 at 11:48  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

31 October 2012 at 11:50  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Julia Gasper,

His Grace thanks you for your contributions. However, as a reasoned Anglican, he opts for the vernacular. Language evolves; words change meaning. This may be irksome, but there's no point speaking Hebrew to Greeks.

31 October 2012 at 12:00  
Blogger non mouse said...

Preacher @ 10:24 ... The Word of God is clear & easily understandable. He is the creator, King & owner of the Cosmos. His laws are supreme & unalterable. Any King, Emperor, President or Politician who tinkers or alters them, does so at their own risk. Yes.

However, Your Grace, it would seem that the blob of jelly who signed the letter above hasn't time to remember that. He is far too busy entertaining all the Lords and Potentates who are his masters in the euSSR.

I just wish I could go and tell them all to get out of Britain.

31 October 2012 at 12:18  
Blogger BeeLZeeBub said...

Sad deluded poisonous fools.

31 October 2012 at 12:20  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Julia Gasper

Unfortunately the homosexual extremists have got control of people's minds and opinions via the media.

Don't kid yourself. The media isn't the problem. It's not an inability to deliver the message. The typical westerner has bought deeply into the evolutionary mindset of self-creation. He has despaired of Truth, and substituted autonomy instead. People accept the normalization of homosexuality because they accept it as a legitimate choice for an autonomous creature. This is a much deeper problem than simply 'media conspiracy.'

carl

31 October 2012 at 12:32  
Blogger Mark said...

won't it be awful when gay marriage comes into law and none of your lives are affected in any way whatsoever

nightmare!

31 October 2012 at 12:39  
Blogger William said...

Mark

"won't it be awful when gay marriage comes into law and none of your lives are affected in any way whatsoever

nightmare!"


Some of us try to think beyond our own lives.

31 October 2012 at 13:03  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

31 October 2012 at 13:05  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

31 October 2012 at 13:11  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

31 October 2012 at 13:15  
Blogger Mark said...

@William

Some of us try to think beyond our own lives

so you admit it won't affect you but it is still important to you that you can make other people's lives more miserable. nice.

@Julia Gasper

you aren't respecting the "facts of life" - that some peopel are gay and form long term committed relationships identical in every practical way to straight peoples'

and before "gay" was slang for "homosexual" it was slang for a female prostitute.

31 October 2012 at 13:41  
Blogger non mouse said...

PS to my post at @12:18. It's the foreign politicians I want out of the country, btw.

Being more concerned about Deconstructionists and the present-day invasion of Britain, I'd forgotten about the homosexuals, for the moment. Of course I wouldn't suggest that anyone should deport Britons of any gender.

31 October 2012 at 14:09  
Blogger William said...

Mark

"so you admit it won't affect you but it is still important to you that you can make other people's lives more miserable. nice."

It may or may not affect me directly, but it will certainly affect others now and even more so in the future when society has no idea what marriage was designed for and we are all compelled to treat homosexual relationships as equivalent to heterosexual relationships.

Please can you explain to me how defining marriage as a voluntary sexual union of one man and one woman is making lives more miserable. Is it because you are unable to have sexual intercourse with your partner? Or perhaps it's because marriage also describes the ideal environment in which to conceive and raise children and you cannot conceive a child with your partner nor provide that ideal environment?

31 October 2012 at 14:14  
Blogger Matt A said...

OK, today I have been on the telephone to UKIP head office, and then Margot Parker, the candidate for UKIP in the Corby/East Northants by election called me back. She confirmed that she would always vote against SSM, and that this is also the policy of UKIP. Nice one, she now gets two extra votes at least (my wife relies on me to tell her which box to cross).

31 October 2012 at 14:15  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

31 October 2012 at 14:47  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

31 October 2012 at 14:56  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

@ Mark. You rae factually incorrent when you assert that homosexuals form "long term committed relationships identical in every practical way to straight peoples'"
They are not identical because they cannot biologically mate. They wish to be different yet they insist on being called the same - not much logic there!!! Denying the biological facts of life is not a good symptom of your mental health

31 October 2012 at 15:00  
Blogger John Knox's lovechild said...

A propos France an interesting little conondrum is developing. An increasing number of mayors, of all political persuasions, are indicating they will refuse to perform gay civil weddings if Hollande's legislation passes.

He cannot sack them because they are elected.

Local democracy versus self important bores with a huge sense of grievance.



31 October 2012 at 15:21  
Blogger John Magee said...

John Know's lovechild

Well said. The conservative adage "the best government is local government" is true because it works. It works because people living in a certain place or region know what's best for their needs. To bureaucrats of all political leanings those words "local government" are like a crucifix to Dracula.

31 October 2012 at 19:01  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Julia and His Nibs

"Gay" as a word has morphed again. .

Nowadays, amongst yoof in the hood, it is a disparaging and offensive term meaning awkward, stupid, or lame.

For example:

"Homosexual marriage is really gay."

31 October 2012 at 19:42  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Hey look, "lame" used to mean "unable to walk because of a leg injury" and now it means "out of fashion" or "naff" or perhaps "stupid"

For example:

"Catholicism is really lame"

31 October 2012 at 20:13  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...

Mark

"that some peopel are gay and form long term committed relationships identical in every practical way to straight peoples"

What practical ways would that be..I cannot think of any.. any that matter anyway... you mean sharing a bank account, or taking a drive together on a Sunday afternoon?

Phil

31 October 2012 at 20:25  
Blogger Owl said...

Thank you Julia Gasper for making some very sensible comments.

I would just like to point out that the use of the word "gay" with it's overtones of outgoing, friendly, happy etc. was, most likely, deliberate. The idea being to associate the meanings of "gay" and "homosexual" in the public mind.

This type of manipulation works, gradually of course.

Blair and Cameron's Fabian masters are experts on directing the thinking of the masses. Quantum Physics for people or sociology, what's the difference?

The backlash will be most likely brutal.

Many homosexuals are feeling it already and Dave will do the rest.

UKIP are the last democratical refuge. If they get infiltrated then we can all paint a picture of what comes after.

31 October 2012 at 22:35  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

1 November 2012 at 10:34  
Blogger Laurence Durnan said...

Some may like to sign this petition:-
http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/Make_Stonewall_Pay_Its_Taxes/?eDZmndb

Make the Stonewall group pay tax as it is not entitled to be called a charity. Charities may not under UK law campaign to change the law (Except if they are homosexual!!)

1 November 2012 at 10:39  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Hey, Gold Lame Hotpants, once thought fabulous, are so gay, don't you think? And, well, lame.

1 November 2012 at 10:49  
Blogger William said...

Julia Gasper

"Marriage for homosexuals is like art galleries for blind people. They don't need it so why do they want it?"

I believe it's to force society into accepting that homosexual relationships are equivalent to heterosexual relationships.

1 November 2012 at 11:10  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

You believe it's...what? Wrong? Foolish? A fallacy? Damaging? Confused? Misguided?
Is there a word missed out in your message?

1 November 2012 at 12:44  
Blogger Laurence Durnan said...

There is nothing at present to stop a same-sex couple from sharing a bank account if they so wish, or from taking a drive on a Sunday afternoon. Those who are unhappy and "miserable" with a civil partnership will always be unhappy and miserable. They will find something else to complain about because there is a disharmony within them, an incongruity between their physical body and their desires. This disturbs them on a deep level.

1 November 2012 at 12:53  
Blogger William said...

Julia Gasper

In answer to your question "why do they want it?", I replied "I believe it's to force society ...", which could be more explicitly written as "I believe that they want it in order to force society ...".

1 November 2012 at 12:59  
Blogger Mark said...

@Phil Roberts

What practical ways would that be..I cannot think of any.. any that matter anyway... you mean sharing a bank account, or taking a drive together on a Sunday afternoon

Is that all that marriage is to you? I'm sorry that it sounds so dreary and limited.

I'm talking about raising children together (and it doesn't matter if those children are adopted or not genetically related to both parents), caring for each other when you're ill or if you've lost your job or a relative dies, trusting the other person to make the right decision if you're in an accident and need someone else to decide on your medical care. Being part of another family other than the one you were born into etc etc etc

@Julia

Marriage for homosexuals is like art galleries for blind people. They don't need it so why do they want it?

why do straight people need it or want it? It is quite possible to have children without getting married and plenty of straight people get married and don't/can't have children.

@Laurence

Those who are unhappy and "miserable" with a civil partnership will always be unhappy and miserable.

I am very happy in my civil partnershiip but I would prefer to ber married and we will "upgrade" when the law allows us to do so.

They will find something else to complain about because there is a disharmony within them, an incongruity between their physical body and their desires. This disturbs them on a deep level.

that's completely incorrect Do you know any gay people and have you spoken to them? I've often heard this kind of thing from straight people who just can't understand that other people aren't the same as them.




1 November 2012 at 13:28  
Blogger William said...

Mark

"I am very happy in my civil partnershiip but I would prefer to ber married and we will "upgrade" when the law allows us to do so."

In order for you to get your lifestyle upgrade, marriage will have to be redefined so much that it will no longer represent and describe the ideal situation in which to conceive and raise the next generation. Could there be a more supreme act of selfishness than this? Why don't you upgrade your phone instead? That way you will be helping the economy and not consigning some children to be brought up without a mother or father.

1 November 2012 at 14:12  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

1 November 2012 at 14:39  
Blogger Laurence Durnan said...

@ Mark:- You say "straight people ...just can't understand that other people aren't the same as them."

Duh?? What I said WAS that homosexuals aren't the same. They are not the same as heterosexuals and their relationships are not the same therefore it's totally bonkers to throw a tantrum because we don't want to be bullied into calling it the same, and messing up marriage to suit you.
The problem is not what we heterosexuals can't understand, It's what you homosexual wierdos don't understand.
BTW several detailed studies, most of them carried out by homosexuals, have concluded that homosexuals do NOT have exclusive relationships even though they pine after the label of being married. Far from it. Very far from it. They are far more promiscuous than heterosexuals and have every intention of remaining so, married or not. Their demand for marriage is a hypocritical one.
Most of them are incapable of having any sort of committed relationship. All those I know are loners and you can see why. They're peculiar.

1 November 2012 at 14:50  
Blogger Mark said...

@William

That way you will be helping the economy and not consigning some children to be brought up without a mother or father

If i have children they will be adopted from council care and already living without a mother and father because their heterosexual parents have failed,abused or neglected them.

The fact that you would condemn them to a life in an institution rather than have them go to a loving family makes your so-called concern for the children seem very hollow.

and there are about 6,000 children in care - straight people aren't adopting them.

@Julia

latching on to one word "upgrade" (which I put in inverted commas to show I wasn't using it entirely seriously) to then embark in a lengthy mind reading fantasy so you can prove to yourself that I am apparently "insane" says more about you than it does about me.

yes, I place value on marriage, but not a commercial valure. how ridiculous. you place value in marriage too, which is why you are shitting yourself at the prospect of gays marrying.

I guess that makes you a hypocrite, as well as someone who can only stigmatise and insult someone you can't argue with in a civilised fashion.

@Laurence

I know which reports you mean - they were written by Paul Cameron, who has been drummed out of the US sociologist and psychologists associations due to the terrible quality of his research

his "evidence" for the promiscuity of gays was taken from interviewing people reporting to an STD clinic. This is not a representative sample of the gay population.

using these "reports" to justify your argument is like using the Protocols of Zion to justify anti-semitism.

1 November 2012 at 18:51  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Laurance Durnan: "Charities may not under UK law campaign to change the law (Except if they are homosexual!!)"

A load of bollocks.

1 November 2012 at 19:10  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Mark

Admit it, you just want to wear a nice dress, be the centre of attention and float down the aisle looking fabulous. How gay!

1 November 2012 at 20:59  
Blogger Mark said...

@dodo

not really, seeing as how I am not a 14 yr old girl.

why? is that why you want to get married?

1 November 2012 at 22:21  
Blogger William said...

Mark

"If i have children they will be adopted from council care and already living without a mother and father because their heterosexual parents have failed,abused or neglected them.

The fact that you would condemn them to a life in an institution rather than have them go to a loving family makes your so-called concern for the children seem very hollow."


This is disingenuous nonsense. The answer to children going into care is stable, loving, monogomous, heterosexual relationships or, as we currently know it, marriage. The fact that you want to redefine marriage from a heterosexual, monogomous sexual union at the centre of a family with children, conceived and raised by their mother and father, into some vague, genderless, sexless cohabition which may or may not involve some kids that may or may not be related to the cohabitants (basically Civil Partnerships with heteros), and then have the gall to pretend to care about institutionalised children is frankly staggering. We should be strengthening marriage. You are fundamentally undermining it.

1 November 2012 at 22:47  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Mark. ‘Marrying’ your same sex partner isn’t going to make you feel any better about how you fit into society. You will still be on the periphery.

1 November 2012 at 23:03  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Mark

Oh, I see, it's your *partner* who wants to get all dressed up and look fabulous for the *upgrade*. Just think of all the fun you'll have choosing the *bridesboys*!

1 November 2012 at 23:11  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

1 November 2012 at 23:13  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

1 November 2012 at 23:41  
Blogger William said...

Mark

You seem genuinely confused about what marriage means to you. First you said that it is making people miserable and then you said that actually you are quite happy with your Civil Partnership and that marriage would be nothing more than an "upgrade". I do wonder if some homosexuals are even capable of understanding what marriage is. In fact that must be the case because by the time they get to make their "upgrade", marriage will no longer be marriage but will just be Civil Partnerships with heteros.

You strike me as someone who knows they want something, but don't really know what it is that they want, or why they want it. Like a child wanting to upgrade their phone.

2 November 2012 at 10:28  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

2 November 2012 at 11:08  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Julia: "William has summed that up nicely, I think. As for DanJo and the others, their increasing use of insult and abuse reveals their lack of solid arguments as well as manners."

Stuck around, luv. You'll see "queer", "bum bandit", "poof", and plenty more from some of the Christians here. You might see Africans called "the lower races" too. When the articles take a break from the gay theme, or gay/atheist people like me sit quietly for a bit, you'll see most of the Catholics turn on the Protestants out of boredom. Finally, if an article turns up about Islam then you'll see some ripe old bits of racism coming out down here. It's actually quite a violent place.

"By the way, I believe that Mr Durnan is correct in saying that charities are not under British law permitted to campaign to change the law. That is stated on the website of the Charities Commission actually."

I'm looking here and it says "Charities can campaign for a change in the law, policy or decisions (as detailed in this guidance in section C4) where such change would support the charity’s purposes. Charities can also campaign to ensure that existing laws are observed."

2 November 2012 at 11:24  
Blogger Laurence Durnan said...

There is an immense amount of reliable research done proving that homosexuals are far more promiscuous than heteroseuxals. For instance the book by Professor Eric Gumby Anderson, recently published by Oxford University Press. Prof Anderson is a homosexual himself and goes around urging everybody to be promiscuous. His study revealed that homosexuals who live together are not monogamous and the bibliography refers to a lot of other research confirming that homosexuals are wildly promiscuous. They are 18 times more likely than heterosexuals to get and transmit venereal diseases. They are also far more likely to use prostitutes, injure each other in domestic violence, engage in dangerous sexual practices and use date-rape drugs (some of which are lethal). All of that is well-established and the gays can bark and deny it as much as they like - the facts are known.
Most of their apparently long-term relationships are "open" relationships and accepting this as normal would further confuse the true nature of marriage, reducing it to something meaningless.
In countries where same-sex "marriage" has been introduced, the divorce rate among homosexuals is already more than double that of heterosexuals. Since homosexuals also have a shorter life-expectancy, it is not at all fair to give them children to adopt. Children would be exposed to all these factors - the violence, the endless succession of casual sex-partners, the disease, the breakdown of relationships after a few months, the mental instability that all this reveals.

2 November 2012 at 11:26  
Blogger Laurence Durnan said...

@ Danjo. You are a liar, sir.
None of the Christians have used such language.
Personally I have only seen such foulness from homosexuals and I have also noted the frequent use of racist terminology by homosexuals.
Your lies are as despicable as your filthy language.

2 November 2012 at 11:28  
Blogger Laurence Durnan said...

The first same-sex couple to get "married" in Holland was later prosecuted for running a major paedophile ring involving several child-care centres and manufacturing child porm for the internet. They were males but not ..er...strictly monogamous.
Suitable adoption candidates?

2 November 2012 at 11:31  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

2 November 2012 at 11:38  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

2 November 2012 at 11:39  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Laurence Durnan: "@ Danjo. You are a liar, sir."

Oh dear, this is going to be like shooting fish in a barrel.

So Laurence Durnan, will I get an abject apology from you if I post a few examples?

2 November 2012 at 11:41  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

How's it going on the Charity Commission thing, Julia? Is it me or you who is mistaken?

2 November 2012 at 11:46  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

2 November 2012 at 11:57  
Blogger Laurence Durnan said...

Stonewall is not eligible for charity status as its aims from the start have been to change laws. There is a difference between a "principle" and and "ancillary" purpose. The principle purpose of Stonewall has always been to campaign to change laws such as Section 28. That is why it was set up. It is not a charity because it does not aim at the "public benefit".
According to the website of the Cahrities Commission, "To be a charity an organisation must be established for charitable purposes only, which are for the public benefit. An organisation will not be charitable if its purposes are political.
Campaigning and political activity can be legitimate and valuable activities for charities to undertake.
However, political campaigning, or political activity, as defined in this guidance, must be undertaken by a charity only in the context of supporting the delivery of its charitable purposes. Unlike other forms of campaigning, it must not be the continuing and sole activity of the charity. (Section D5 provides a fuller explanation.)"

2 November 2012 at 12:04  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Julia: "Your filthy language and personal abuse are beneath contempt."

Nothing to say about the Christians doing it, Julia? Or don't you believe me?

2 November 2012 at 12:09  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Oh, and Julia, what about the Charity Commission thing? You must have missed that comment.

2 November 2012 at 12:10  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Laurence, how's it going with your allegation of lies? Is it to be an apology upfront or will you call my bluff?

2 November 2012 at 12:12  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Laurence Durnan: "Stonewall is not eligible for charity status as its aims from the start have been to change laws."

It got charitable status in 2003 after branching out. So, are you retreating from your original claim quoted below that charities cannot campaign to change the law? Feel free to say so.

"Charities may not under UK law campaign to change the law (Except if they are homosexual!!)"

2 November 2012 at 12:16  
Blogger Laurence Durnan said...

"Charities may not under UK law campaign to change the law (Except if they are homosexual!!)"

2 November 2012 at 12:31  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I see when push comes to shove the two of you have very little personal integrity at all. In particular, you, Laurence. A quick google would have shown you the truth before you sounded off with the abuse. Yet you won't apologise now even when the spotlight is on you.

2 November 2012 at 12:39  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

2 November 2012 at 16:02  
Blogger William said...

Julia, Laurence

I regret to inform you that DanJ0 is entirely correct when he asserts that insulting/rude language is not the preserve of non-christians on this blog.

2 November 2012 at 16:18  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Julia: "Nobody is going to apologize to you and the demand merits only a response of LOL."

*shrug*

I invite the silent reader to make what they will of that.

2 November 2012 at 16:46  
Blogger John Magee said...

Inspector

What a bizarre world we live in today. Gays want to get "married" while over half of all hetrosexual married couples will get divorced or separate at some point in their marriage.

Wait until "married" Gays start getting divorced and have to divvy up their property and fight over the cat and dog. Then let's see how the partner with the highest income feels when he/she has to pay "palimony" payments. After all that they both have to pay their divorce attorneys (barristers)!

Marriage may be easy to get into but it is pure hell to get out of as "married" gays will soon discover when they get tired of each other after six months.

2 November 2012 at 16:49  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

John, you've said that before and I've pointed out in response that we already have civil partnerships and their dissolution potentially carries responsibilities just like divorce.

2 November 2012 at 16:53  
Blogger William said...

Julia @16:02

I have just re-read your comment and come to the conclusion that if your first sentence was true before the comment, it certainly wasn't true by the end of it. Or do I do you an injustice?

2 November 2012 at 16:56  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Incidentally Julia, lest you turn on William you should know that he's a Christian, and hardly a friend of mine. Whilst there are a number of homophobic Christians down here, I don't think he is one of those at all.

2 November 2012 at 16:57  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Check out dissolutions here

2 November 2012 at 17:00  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Felicitations John. One notes DanJ0 baring his teeth, cornered rat style. Excellent, one fetches his shovel...

2 November 2012 at 18:08  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Inspector, in what alternative universe is that happening? Those two poor newbies have been hung out to dry and yer man John there has had yet another of his misunderstandings set right. I really should beat my chest, Tarzan-like, at this point.

2 November 2012 at 20:13  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Actually, scrub that image. I don't want you to have another sleepless night thinking about muscular, bare-chested men in short leather pants again.

2 November 2012 at 20:14  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

I see DanJ0 is playing his social engineering game again, manipulating people in order to attempt to score points and embarrass them.

What a piece of work!

And, by the way, whatever others say, his language is foul especially when he boasts about his sexual antics. Actually, I'm inclined to believe he is a closet homosexual who only occassionally indulgences his morally disordered passions and is then racked with self loathing.

2 November 2012 at 21:19  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I am indeed occasionally coarse, though mostly for effect. However, I don't tell lies, or indulge in deception, or deliberately misquote people, or be properly sleazy to some of the women (or men in my case) here, unlike you Dodo. I also remember you boasting about some of your memorable youthful experiences trying to convert lesbians. In fact, here's a link which not only includes a whole raft of stuff by you about dildos and those lucky lesbians, it also includes you switching IDs back and forth. Enjoy.

http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/government-to-legislate-for-gay.html

2 November 2012 at 22:17  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I forgot to mention the horse and sheep thing too. Oops.

2 November 2012 at 22:29  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

DanJ0

I see you're a bit of a prude and pharisee under all that liberalism.

LOL!

What a wonderful trip down memory lane. Thank you so much! One of the funniest threads I've read. I strongly commend it to all readers. OIG and English Viking in full glory. Brilliant.

Is this the comment where I'm boasting?

"I've known some absolutely beautiful women who were predisposed towards towards other women. Sadly best efforts to cure them from their affliction were mostly unsuccessful, with one or two very memorable exceptions.

I did it all for the Lord!

This was in my sinful, lustful youth when like Saint Augustine, my ardent prayer was "Grant me chastity and continence, but not yet""


I meant ever word too and had a real giggle writing it down.

And is this the one alluding to aids and animal sex?

"Mind you, who knows these days with the arificial 'aids' available to accompany these depraved practises.

It won't be too before "marriages" between sheep are men are on the agenda.

I was once professionally involved with a man who offered as mitigation for copulating with a horse the fervent belief the creature loved him!"


Again all true. Maybe a tad unethical making light of a former clients personal problems.

Have you no sense of humour?

And I'm now "properly sleazy to some of the women (or men in my case) here." Sleazy?! What are you implying? I indulge in the occassional flirt but most certainly NOT with you!

YUK.

Are you jeaolous? Is that it?

Big hugs and kisses to you darling.

Mwah.

2 November 2012 at 23:43  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

It should be obvious to everyone by now that danjo is not only humourless but is obsessed with you Dodo. It does not help his condition by you hugging kissing and calling him darling even though
we all know you are winding him up.

He will interpret it differently and think he has a chance of a relationship with you.You must know he is delusionary.I cannot imagine why you are behaving so cruelly towards this poor unfortunate creature.

3 November 2012 at 06:25  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo, you're a blatant hypocrite and you're all the more absurd for it. What a berk.

3 November 2012 at 06:35  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Cressida, you seem very keen to talk about me on all the threads I'm commenting on despite your comment yesterday. You are genuinely quite unstable, aren't you?

3 November 2012 at 06:38  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

On all the threads you comment on..
no not true and if I choode to I will.

Unstable...LOL. Part of your problem is you are devoid of humour.Dreary!

If you really believe I am Dodo then you should seek medical advice. I am no longer ignoring your provocation in this matter in my usually good natured manner. I am intending to become far more assertive in defence of myself.

3 November 2012 at 07:30  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

3 November 2012 at 11:04  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

3 November 2012 at 11:05  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

3 November 2012 at 11:14  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Julia: "This supposed to be Cranmer's blog. Unfortunately some exhibitionists with fake names like Banjo have taken it over and are using to abuse all and sundry and display their own boundless vanity."

It also has his 'bottom line' over to the right there. You might also like to note that the blog owner has what you call a "fake name" too. It's called a nom de plume and it has its purposes. For all my boundless vanity, I have intellectual integrity. Unlike you, it seems. You are unwilling to acknowledge when you are wrong, choosing to try to insult instead. It's not great, is it?

3 November 2012 at 11:43  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

3 November 2012 at 12:00  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

3 November 2012 at 12:10  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Julia, firstly, I'm gay, I'm an atheist, and I advocate a secular State. It's hardly surprising. Also, I don't comment here to be liked. Secondly, you have shown exactly what you have as far as intellectual integrity goes in the comments above. It's in black and white. You were even corrected and criticised by one of the Christians here and you ignored that too. Thirdly, I've just been reading your blog and its links and stories. I note that you often seem to call for apologies from people and get snotty when you don't get them. I'll add "hyprocrite" to your attributes too, I think.

3 November 2012 at 12:11  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

BanJ0 said ...
"Dodo, you're a blatant hypocrite and you're all the more absurd for it. What a berk."

Ooooo .... I love it when you're mean to me ... chase me!
Mwah.

And then:
"For all my boundless vanity, I have intellectual integrity."

LOL!

Maybe he does have a sense of humour, after all!

3 November 2012 at 12:15  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

It's like Bedlam Open Day around here at the moment.

3 November 2012 at 12:22  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Incidentally Julia, one of the reasons for using nom de plumes is to divorce real life things from stuff on the internet. Your dubious behaviour here will now be visible in google searches on your name, including by employers, voters, and others who might reasonably want to see what you're about. That suggests to me that you lack common sense too.

3 November 2012 at 12:41  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Cressida said ...

"It should be obvious to everyone by now that danjo is not only humourless but is obsessed with you Dodo. It does not help his condition by you hugging kissing and calling him darling even though we all know you are winding him up."

Ah, but then maybe like the Inspector, Albert and one or two others, I am a repressed homosexual who cannot hide my true subconscious feelings for him.

"He will interpret it differently and think he has a chance of a relationship with you.You must know he is delusionary.I cannot imagine why you are behaving so cruelly towards this poor unfortunate creature."

Where there's life there's hope.

"You gotta have a dream,
If you don't have a dream,
How you gonna have a dream come true?"


His Nibs recently posted:

" ... mockery, criticism or insult are often the means by which those opinions may be changed or beliefs develop and mature. He doesn't enjoy having his feelings hurt, but feelings are the pathway to the spirit and may naturally disturb the mind toward deeper reflection."

3 November 2012 at 12:55  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

I say Dodo, you are absolutely right. Julia is but a hairs breath away from being branded a repressed lesbian. Rather amuses this man that the highest level of insult DanJ0 can come up with as a homosexual man is to accuse his greatest adversaries of homosexuality too.

Sweet irony, what !

3 November 2012 at 13:45  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Greatest adversaries? You two are Sesame Street's Bert and Ernie of the forum.

3 November 2012 at 13:52  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

An old duck could find himself set upon by a mob of pink frilly knickered gays armed with padded coat hangers if he continues to carry on in this way.I am presuming he would not find this a
pleasant experience.

3 November 2012 at 14:04  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Good Lord, he’s on site here and now. It’s the ‘Mouse and Wheel’ for this man. Will have to walk past Gloucester’s latest gay contribution to the world, the rainbow place ‘Benders’

3 November 2012 at 14:13  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Inspector
As suggested earlier, maybe we should show some Christian charity towards this confused, poor lost soul.

Cressida
Change that to a mob wearing gold lamé hot pants and, who knows, I might just be tempted!

Do you think they might "pejazzle" themselves up too if I ask nicely? Seemingly it's the "hottest new trend" for men in salons nationwide.

Ps
What's with the padded coat-hangers? That sounds a bit scary!

3 November 2012 at 14:35  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

It's just occurred to me - if the woman is "vejazzled" and the man "pejazzled", couldn't it all get a wee bit complicated?

3 November 2012 at 14:39  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

I feel a poem coming on but can't get past the title.

"Tangled up in Gems"

3 November 2012 at 14:49  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I realise I'm banging on again about multiple IDs but that Laurence Durnan ID looks rather suspect. Despite your past history Dodo, I don't think it's you either.

3 November 2012 at 14:56  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Dodo. As suggested earlier, maybe we should show some Christian charity towards this confused, poor lost soul.

hmmm Christian charity. A difficult one that. Although he is not a sworn enemy of Christianity, he would have that our faith no longer be a driving force in society. A lost soul making us an island of lost souls, if you will. A curious stance as more than half the population express some sort of religious belief, and overwhelmingly Christian at that. Contrast that with his damn keenness on homosexual marriage, open to 1.5% of the population. Something isn’t right. Can you tell what it is children. That’s it class, right first time. It’s rank hypocrisy AND outrageous self interest. Extra milk for you all tomorrow my darlings.

So no, he’s lost to us at the moment. As Jesus said to the centurion, come with me. If you don’t I really don’t want to know anymore, thou having had thou chance.


3 November 2012 at 17:37  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

3 November 2012 at 19:09  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Actually, I'm quite interested in this as it goes, Julia. It's not the story so much as the site itself, edited by Laurence Durnan, that has caught my attention. I thought I recognised the name.

3 November 2012 at 20:06  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Laurence the editor has this google account yet the blogger commenting above has this google account. The second one has no-one linked and has only one item posted, a month after that blog story. Coincidentally, it's written in the same style as yours, Julia. Also, that google account seems to have posted its comments around the times you did and in much the same style and tone as yours. You weren't very happy with your story on that blog by the look of it. It's all very curious.

3 November 2012 at 20:22  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

But perhaps I'm just being overly suspicious again.

3 November 2012 at 20:23  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Julia and Laurence. Keep heartened old things. DanJ0, that unter offizer in the Gaystapo, has a file on you. Join the club...

3 November 2012 at 21:19  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

The comments under the story that I linked are interesting as they develop too.

3 November 2012 at 22:06  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

You be careful gay boy, and stay the right side of on line harassment. The Inspector would be disappointed if you started posting on Cranmer with prison notepaper. Being an enthusiastic CS won't save you...

3 November 2012 at 22:13  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Perhaps Nigel Farage will defend my right to comment given that it's all in the public domain and ultimately referenced through the two profiles here.

3 November 2012 at 22:38  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Oh leave the middle-aged fantasist alone in his one bedroomed flat. He's a nerd full of a sense of his own importance.

His puritanical approach to blogging ethics is simple compensation for his awaremess his life is amoral and all over the place.

I mean, really, what sort of person invests the time and energy needed to keep detailed records on others?

3 November 2012 at 23:28  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...


Jawohl ! Herr Oberst Bird.

One wonders why it is so important for him to publicise his bendy business. I say old chap, do you think he’s looking for validation of his lifestyle ?

Oh yes, lest one forgets, sieg heil, old man.

3 November 2012 at 23:41  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Inspector
I repeat what I observed earlier on this thread about our troubled middle-aged man:

"Actually, I'm inclined to believe he is a closet homosexual who only occassionally indulgences his morally disordered passions and is then racked with self loathing."

That's why he draws abusive comments from you and posts such graphic accounts of his sexual activities which, incidentally, are fairly moderate by homosexual standards.

Cressida was quite correct. He needs regular humiliation fixes.

4 November 2012 at 00:34  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Ps

I prefer "God Bless" to "Hail Victory" as, when it comes, and pray God it does, it will be His victory not ours.

And less of the "old man", if you please! I've just turned 60 (last week) and am in my prime. A cross between Sean Connery and Kevin Costner - charm and emotional depth.

4 November 2012 at 00:40  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

4 November 2012 at 00:45  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

You are a wise and youthful bird, old chum. The Inspector is a mere Hot Wing in your presence.

Onwards and upwards, what !

4 November 2012 at 00:46  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Oh, I just can't resist. The Flesh is weak, and the Spirit isn't even willing.

A cross between Sean Connery and Kevin Costner - charm and emotional depth.

Is it ...

"Bond. Dodo Bond. Agent 007. Licensed to kill .. my own arguments."

Or is it ...

"Dances with Dodo." The touching story of Dodo Dunbar - the upright orthodox Catholic who is sent to subdue a tribe of Protestants and ends up one of them.

;)

carl

4 November 2012 at 00:56  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Carl, it's none of the above; its so much more.

I was thinking of Sean Connory in 'The Untouchables'. And Costner in 'Message in a Bottle'.

You must learn to think 'outside the box'. It is good to see you being mischievous - would Calvin approve?

4 November 2012 at 01:46  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Ummm ... Dodo?

"Message in a Bottle" is a chick flick. You are hereby ordered to present your Man-Card to the appropriate authorities for immediate revocation.

carl

4 November 2012 at 02:07  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Have you no soul Mr Jacobs? You must learn to connect with your femine side. It's a tale of true love, loyalty and redemption.

So what roles would you cast yourself in if you were a movie star?

Go on, dare you!

4 November 2012 at 02:12  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Dodo

It's a tale of true love, loyalty and redemption.

You shouldn't know this, Dodo. You shouldn't know anything about this movie other than "I can't watch that! It's a chick flick." You have committed a grave infraction of the Rules of Guys. If you want to watch an acceptable movie with a female protagonist, then you may watch Kill Bill.

So what roles would you cast yourself in if you were a movie star?

Major T. J. Kong in Strangelove, or perhaps Captain Frank Ramsey in Crimson Tide.

carl

4 November 2012 at 02:23  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Although I must admit, Dodo ... I have always been partial to the Kenshin Himura saga. I think I would have made a good Hitokiri Battōsai.

carl

4 November 2012 at 03:16  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "His puritanical approach to blogging ethics is simple compensation for his awaremess his life is amoral and all over the place."

You've checked out the links by the look of it. Of course, you've done something similar yourself so you can hardly criticise it; you have to characterise expectations of honesty and integrity as "puritanical" instead. Yet I am the amoral one. For someone who claims to believe in moral absolutism, you have an strange approach to putting it into action.

4 November 2012 at 06:52  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

I am sure you do not look a day over 59 Dodo. Bon Anniversaire.
What do you want for your Birthday?
Vinyl Shorts? (giggles)

4 November 2012 at 08:01  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

'Kill Bill' Why am I not surprised Carl.Extremely brutal violent and anti women. True to form.

4 November 2012 at 08:04  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

But Carl .... didn't Hitokiri Battōsai, after a life of murderous assinations, turn wanderer and vow never to kill again? A man intent on protecting everyone from harm without hurting others?

He would never nuke a country to teach the world a lesson!

Cressida, thank you for the birthday wishes. Vinyle shorts?! God no. They must be Pearl Lamé!

4 November 2012 at 12:03  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

4 November 2012 at 12:04  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Cressida

'Kill Bill' Why am I not surprised Carl.

How do I say this nicely? The cluelessness with which you approach commentary is truly Olympian in its dimensions. You write with such earnestness about that which you possess absolutely no understanding. The point shines in the darkness right before your eyes, and still you do not comprehend it.

If I was going to seriously recommend a movie, I would recommend Departures - winner in 2009 of both the Japan Academy Prize and the Academy Award for Best Foreign Film. Now you will undoubtedly say something like "I would never watch a film you recommend." Which further proves my point.

carl

4 November 2012 at 12:55  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Dodo

didn't Hitokiri Battōsai, after a life of murderous assinations, turn wanderer and vow never to kill again?

Well, that's because he accidentally mortally wounds his first wife, Tomoe, whom he truly loves, and while she is dying she makes him promise, and ... see, there is always a woman at the center of these things. But Kenshin never completely ceases to be the Hitokiri Battōsai. (That's a title, and not a name, btw.) You have to watch the eyes.

Kenshin is worth your time to watch (or read.) It's simply a great story.

carl

4 November 2012 at 13:10  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Gosh, how do I say you are a belligerent ignoramus nicely in american, carl.Amusing to think you fancy yourself as a film critic as well as a half baked authority on Christianity. Your
arrogance in presuming to know anything, apart from 'square bashing' let alone what I am going to say is breathtaking.

4 November 2012 at 14:00  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Sorry Dodo, pearl lame shorts not available in supersize.

4 November 2012 at 14:27  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Carl

Yes, but he kept his promise with honour and in the process reformed internally as his wife knew he would. No?

You clearly have a fascination with Japanese culture and films. I wiil watch the films you've recommended if they're available on Amazon.

I must confess to having watched Kill Bill more than once. I just find Uma Thurman - "the deadliest woman in the world" - well, let's just say, fascinating.

4 November 2012 at 14:41  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

DanJ0

Do get a real life, dear boy. There are more important things in this world than chasing down the occassional 'sock puppet'. Besides, you will go blind with all this incessant googling!

I dub you:

DanJ0 Dastardly - Enemy of Sock Puppets

Mwah

4 November 2012 at 14:46  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Dodo

Kenshin isn't a film. It's a Japanese animated TV show (based on a Manga) that ran over three season. It has something like 95 episodes, plus two OVAs to explain the origin and conclusion of Kenshin's life. It's essentially a 60-hour movie, and so involves a substantial time commitment. If you do watch it, make sure you watch the Japanese version with sub-titles. The version created for the US market at least was 'sanitized' for American TV. In Japan, animation is primarily made for adults.

carl

4 November 2012 at 15:23  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

'Santizied' for violence, that is. Not sex.

carl

4 November 2012 at 15:31  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "Do get a real life, dear boy. There are more important things in this world than chasing down the occassional 'sock puppet'."

One might think there's more important things in this world than actually creating sock puppets to use on forums too. But not to you or UKIP Gasper, it seems.

4 November 2012 at 16:01  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Honesty and integrity are pretty important, I'd say. Especially if one claims to be religious.

4 November 2012 at 16:03  
Blogger Julia Gasper said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

4 November 2012 at 16:35  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I can see why you only got 69 votes now, Julia.

4 November 2012 at 16:42  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

DanJo

You're soooo terribly mean to people - that's what I find attractive about you.

Well, at least I use a consistent moniker when I post on other blogs. Do you?

Mwah.

4 November 2012 at 16:51  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I suspect there may be more "DanJ0" instances popping up soon, probably saying all sorts of dubious stuff and linking back to here.

4 November 2012 at 17:03  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

You're such a suspicious chapie! All one has to do is click on the post and establish if its authentic.

Why don't you use one moniker? You've nothing to hide - have you?

4 November 2012 at 17:06  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Yes, I've got lots to hide. My bank details, my home address, my workplace, the name of my family pet, my first car, my favourite colour, where I was born, the name of my primary school, and a whole load of other things used as (say) security questions.

4 November 2012 at 17:11  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

If my home address were available somewhere then my chatting about a forthcoming holiday somewhere else might not be such a good idea.

4 November 2012 at 17:13  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Yes but none of the above stops you using a consistent moniker, does it?

Why different 'identities' on different blogs?

4 November 2012 at 20:24  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo, I publish into 'information domains' like any sensible person does, consciously or not. There's nothing wrong with that at all as you very well know. Compare that with your activity of creating sock puppets on this forum to deliberately deceive people and to appear to have support, or creating false accounts to bring someone's real name into disrepute which mght be going on above. That you try to throw out chaff like this shows how morally degenerate you are despite your claims of being religious. You are shameless.

4 November 2012 at 20:55  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Tell me what Jesus would do, Dodo? Would he behave like you on this forum? Would he be homophobic for 'fun'? Would he troll other forums and boast about it? Would he lie? Would he boast about his pre-marital sexual exploits? Would he feel the joy you appear to have trying to cause trouble? Would he expect Catholics to try to live up to Christian ideals? What do you think?

4 November 2012 at 21:06  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

DanJ0. Jesus would tell YOU to adopt a heterosexual lifestyle or celibacy. He would not be too impressed with you supporting gay marriage, so he wouldn’t...

4 November 2012 at 22:17  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I'm an atheist, Inspector. You and Dodo are the ones who claim to be Catholic. My questions are relevant to you, not me, as it's your own yardstick by which you're being judged. Hope this helps.

4 November 2012 at 22:34  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

DanJ0

Do stop wriggling around and answer the question.

Why do you use different monikers - you know, the name one uses - on different blogs? It is not a difficult question to answer. Or is it?

4 November 2012 at 23:04  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

Inspector

Have you noticed our little friend's basic strategy when cornered?

He has a few rather tactics. He attacks one's sexuality, one's identified career, one's blogging identity and, when all else fails, suggests one is either not a "real" Catholics, just trolling, or else failing to live up to the standards of Christianity.

Now, should one react by providing evidence of some sort he stores this in his files for use at a later date. He will, of course, put a particular 'spin' on this 'evidence'. For him, this is a potential 'win-win' situation. One either leaves the spun account unchallenged or gets drawn into a series of long and spiteful exchanges.

In addition, he displays a complete lack of humour and, further, is unable to understand irony or sarcasm.

In short, he just plays games on here and gets his jollies off arguing with older men who have uncompromising views about his (expressed or repressed?) homosexuality.

4 November 2012 at 23:47  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

What would Jesus do, Dodo? You're a self-identifying Catholic. Isn't it a question you should be asking yourself? Would he behave like you do here?

5 November 2012 at 06:42  
Blogger William said...

DanJ0

Jesus would say "I love you because you are my son. Please come home"

5 November 2012 at 09:10  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

William, judging by his ongoing behaviour and lack of shame I don't think Dodo gives a hoot what he says even if Dodo is actually hearing it. Of course, I'm an atheist and he claims to be a Roman Catholic so one might expect different things there.

5 November 2012 at 09:51  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

So - no answer then DanJ0 to your own blogging practices. Why am I not surprised?

Hypocrite.

5 November 2012 at 12:38  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo, what more am I obliged to say? I used to be on the Channel 4 forums before they closed and I had an ID there. My facebook requires a first and surname combination so "DanJ0" wouldn't do. Usenet required an email address. I was thrown off a Muslim forum but they required an ID in another format. You've already been over my use of "DanJ0" on another blog and the newspaper comments area with a fine toothcomb looking for personal information. You said it was all very revealing in some vague, unspecified way but nothing has come of it as far as I can see. Perhaps you want to grub over my technical queries and advice about embedded software under the ID there for information that reveals something terrible about my character? Who knows?

I have a confession to make about my email use though so you might want to sit down before continuing. I have multiple email addresses in different formats! I have a server-side one which I use to register on various websites. It captures junk email and i use it to avoid downloading viruses. I have one for friends and family which I don't give out very often. I have a separate one for sites like eBay and Amazon and regularly used mail order websites. Shocking, I know. Perhaps it's a terrible indictment of my character in some unspecified way or other but it works for me and I'm not ashamed of that. It seems quite sensible to me even if weirdos like you may be troubled by the idea. Sorry.

5 November 2012 at 13:20  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

So, what would Jesus do, Dodo? Would he behave like you on this forum? Would he be pleased and impressed to see your output given that the primary attribute of your persona on this forum is Roman Catholic? Are you even trying to be like the Christian ideal? Do you actually care at all? Hmmm?

5 November 2012 at 13:24  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

DanJ0

Yes, but why do you use different blogger names on different blogging sites you currently?

All this smoke and mirrors about Facebook, Amazon and the like! You still have not answered.

As for my Christianity and whether or not I live up to Our Lord's standards. Of course I fall short - frequently.

You really are a crashing bore and a pompous self-rightous nerd, lacking a sense of humour. Start to face up to your own issues - you know what they are.

Love and Kisses

Mwah

5 November 2012 at 16:09  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

5 November 2012 at 16:59  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

5 November 2012 at 17:08  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo, I only have, and have only ever had, one Google blogger account. It's "DanJ0" and I'm posting with it now. What exactly is the point here? Is it that you think the possibility that I might be commenting on a completely unrelated website elsewhere using a different ID to the blogger one means that your repeated use of sock puppets here to deceive people is somehow not quite as bad as it appears and that I'm a hypocrite for treating you with contempt? If that's your best attempt at a defence then you're even more of a berk than ever.

5 November 2012 at 18:28  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

So, if you recognise that you fall short of the Christian ideal then what are you actually doing about it? Aren't you obliged to feel ashamed and try to change? Yet you seem to revel in your moral degeneracy and show no signs of trying to change. Why is that? It looks like you don't actually give a crap about your religion to me, other than as a means to troll non-Catholic religious forums and gay forums. You really need to ask yourself: What would Jesus do?

5 November 2012 at 18:30  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

See DanJ0 true to form, just as I predicted a few comments ago. You are so transparent! Like a stuck record. You have a very weird conception of the term 'moral degeneracy'!

What would Jesus do? Why don't you reflect on that question? You could even ask him. I doubt my behaviour on here would outrage Him. I mean you spin it into something it isn't because of your own *issues* and total lack of humour.

As I recall, and I don't keep detailed files like you, a while ago you disclosed using different blogger names on sites - to cover your identity. Do you deny it? Now I may be wrong but its really not worth the effort tracking it down.

Now run along and pester another older man. There's a good little boy.

5 November 2012 at 19:23  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "As I recall, and I don't keep detailed files like you, a while ago you disclosed using different blogger names on sites - to cover your identity. Do you deny it? Now I may be wrong but its really not worth the effort tracking it down."

Dodo, clearly I use a nom de plume, and I use it to separate aspects of my online life from my real-life. You do too. There are very sensible reasons for that as people who have been on the Net since the beginning know well. I deny having more than one Google blogger account. This is the only one I have and it is the only one I use here. I set it up when the blog owner stopped anonymous and type-in-name commenting specifically so I could carry on using the site. I don't maintain files on people either, I just have a good memory. However, when I make accusations I make sure I can back them up with linked evidence before I do so, as you have found out to your cost and humiliation a number of times.

5 November 2012 at 19:49  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

5 November 2012 at 19:51  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "What would Jesus do? Why don't you reflect on that question?"

Dodo, I'm an atheist. As far as I am concerned, Jesus died 2000 years or so ago so there's no basis to your religion. However, you claim to be a Roman Catholic and so I actually have the yardstick by which to judge you. I don't think it rates lying or deception or malice very highly. Moreover, it expects you to try to be better when you fail to live up to it, yet you can't actually be arsed. You prefer to live in your immoral way, as determined by your own religious yardstick. If it didn't matter then gay Catholics could co-habit and have an ongoing sex-life without worrying about religious obligations, yet you would be one of the first to condemn that behaviour so clearly you recognise that there are significant obligations to be moral in your religion. You just can't be arsed with them yourself.

5 November 2012 at 19:56  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

DanJ0

Ooooo, I bet you've been preparing that little outburst for a while.

Lying, deception, immorality and malice - goodness me, someone has let you down very badly! Sounds like an episode of Eastenders. Your early developmental problems run very deep indeed.

Now to blogging identity. You said:

"I deny having more than one Google blogger account. This is the only one I have and it is the only one I use here."

Fair enough.

So do you have accounts other than Google or post with different 'nom de plumes' on various sites? You know you do.

You're so evasive!

5 November 2012 at 20:26  
Blogger The Way of Dodo said...

This reveals more about you than me:

"If it didn't matter then gay Catholics could co-habit and have an ongoing sex-life without worrying about religious obligations, yet you would be one of the first to condemn that behaviour so clearly you recognise that there are significant obligations to be moral in your religion. You just can't be arsed with them yourself."

The last sentence, in particular, is revealing.

5 November 2012 at 20:29  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "So do you have accounts other than Google or post with different 'nom de plumes' on various sites? You know you do."

F'goodness'sake Dodo, you have nothing at all to work with yet you still try to fight back regardless. I'm actually quite embarrassed for you now. It's as though you think that as long as you keep talking then you might be able to pull something out of the bag. Next time you see trouble, my advice is to keep out of it and you might not get so humiliated.

5 November 2012 at 20:54  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

My other advice is to give up claiming to be a practising Roman Catholic. You're so crap at it that you might as well be an atheist for all the good it does you.

5 November 2012 at 20:56  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older