Comments on: Gay rights legislation is ‘a secular attack on the Catholic Church’ says bigoted Labour MP

By: Valdemar

Valdemar — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 15:39:50 +0000

The logical corollary to insisting that gay people can’t be adoptive parents is to insist that gays can’t be parents at all. Perhaps this unpleasant, smirking MP would share his views on that? Oh well, another reason not to vote Labour. That makes about 112 so far…

By: Stuart H.

Stuart H. — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 12:52:13 +0000

A small alarm gone off in my head here…
If they’re merging with ‘local Catholic welfare groups’might be worth checking if they get public funding, then at the group really behind the service.
Pro-Life groups have got good at setting up splinter charities ostensibly helping young mums with accomodation and so on, but in reality some money might be going into their usual campaigns. It’s one thing if the money just comes from church collections, but if they’re getting public funding to provide a social service and use small charity opt-outs on presenting accounts to hide money being creamed off to spend on anti-abortion campaigning and so on, that would be quite another matter.

By: Buffy

Buffy — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 21:15:50 +0000

Let them stop providing services. Bigots are not needed. I’m sure there are plenty of agencies that can serve *all* families.

By: michael martin

michael martin — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 20:45:46 +0000

So this is where thier deluded “faith schools” idea comes from…

By: Tony Konrath

Tony Konrath — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 13:46:57 +0000

I’d point out that this statement…
“Several other adoption agencies around the country have cut their ties with the Roman Catholic Church – which has ruled that gay adoption is morally wrong – in order to comply with the Equality Act.”
… gets it wrong. Agencies are cutting their ties because the RCC agency is morally wrong!

By: nullifidian

nullifidian — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 07:51:43 +0000

I’m absolutely shocked that this MP is, quite openly, demanding to be allowed to be a bigot.

Let’s hope that decent-minded Mancunians vote this wingnut out at the next available opportunity.

By: Cal

Cal — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 21:46:59 +0000

Those who complain of discrimination against religion always do so with a tongue most deplorably forked. Beyond that they see religion prioritised over sexual orientation, which is entirely illogical because [respectively] one is a school of thought based around superstition and vacuous conservatism, and the other is an in-built impulse, an instinctive attraction towards people who meet a certain criterion. Why anyone would seek to deprive anybody of the latter is beyond me.

You know what? Had the Abrahamic doctrine not enveloped the west and slowly catalysed oppression of homosexuality across huge portions its imperial territories we might not get so much BS from people like this unsavoury hack (who, for crying out loud, is a LABOUR MP; at what point did the party’s ethos embrace oppression of an already-oppressed group!? Is “New Labour” really this far removed from its original socialist roots?) and that idealist creature from that Northern Ireland broadcast who condoned through a public channel the hideous and nigh-impossible practise of “converting” people to heterosexuality.