News

Homosexual ‘bullies’ force removal of Lord Carey portrait

Homosexual ‘bullies’ force removal of Lord Carey portrait

The Christian Institute has vented it’s anger over a decision by King’s College in London top remove a window depicting former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey.

The CI reports that it was removed because of a successful five-year campaign by LGBT “bullies” who had branded Carey a “homophobe”.

In 2012, Lord Carey, a King’s College alumnus, had expressed opposition to the legalisation of same-sex marriage.

Ben Hunt, President of King’s Students’ Union and a leader of the campaign, wrote:

LGBT+ students over several years had been concerned with the portrayal of Lord Carey of Clifton as an alumni who should be celebrated.

He added that he worked with the university on the new display that would:

Express a community which strives to be accepting of diversity and inclusive.

Last year, King’s Students’ Union newspaper, ROAR, ran the headline:

Lord Carey ‘to be pulled from Strand windows’ after LGBT group win two-year anti-homophobia campaign.

The university claims the decision was taken to remove the picture to make way for new TV screens to be put up, and to better reflect the diversity of the college’s alumni.

Founded as a Christian institution, it has been criticised for its decision.

An article by one of its own lecturers, Niall McCrae, and Anglican minister Revd Dr Jules Gomes slammed the move, saying:

To label Carey a homophobe is to enter the theatre of the absurd.

They attributed his vilification to LGBT campaigners who refuse to acknowledge that clergymen are able to care for all:

While maintaining a traditional view on marriage.

They also highlighted what they called “Orwellian doublethink” of LGBT activists who “carry the baton of tolerance” while attacking Lord Carey.

The Christian Institute’s Simon Calvert said:

Their world is framed by identity politics, with positive discrimination for those of favoured status, while any unfavourable attributes (as arbitrarily determined) are open to attack.

Calvert added that if it was true that the Archbishop’s view on marriage was one of the reasons for his picture’s removal, then King’s would have to:

Get rid of many more pictures – and many students and staff too. Despite all the bullying, vast numbers of people still believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and they always will. The public are fed up of LGBT witch-hunts. What happened to all that talk of diversity and tolerance

The Telegraph said in an editorial that:

Some of the current generation of students seem intent on using the opportunities higher education offers them to close their minds rather than open them. Instead of embracing challenging ideas and thinkers, they seek to block out those ideas and exclude their authors. And sadly, some university authorities are abetting this juvenile drive to censorship.

It also noted that opposition to same-sex marriage was ‘hardly a marginal view’.

12 responses to “Homosexual ‘bullies’ force removal of Lord Carey portrait”

  1. barriejohn says:

    Their world is framed by identity politics, with positive discrimination for those of favoured status, while any unfavourable attributes…are open to attack.

    Which is precisely how Christians act. How come where anyone else is concerned it becomes “as arbitrarily determined”, as if no principles are involved?

  2. AgentCormac says:

    ‘To label Carey a homophobe is to enter the theatre of the absurd.’

    Really? That’ll be the same George Carey who claimed that re-defining marriage would ‘strike at the very fabric of society’. And also claimed that ‘We should beware of mirroring our society’s near-obsession with sexual matters’. Which to my mind is a bit feckin’ rich to put it mildly, coming as it does from the ex-head of an institution which for centuries has used ‘sexual matters’ as a way of controlling people and in an untold number of cases making their lives an absolute bloody misery. Shame on the hypocritical old bastard and well done King’s College.

    http://www.theroadtoemmaus.org/RdLb/32Ang/Ang/CAREY01.HTM

  3. Alan Crowe says:

    This George Carey?

    Carey is alleged to have been part of a cover-up, which shielded serial sex-abuser Peter Ball (the former bishop of Lewes and Gloucester) from prosecution.[45] When questioned about the now jailed former bishop, Carey commented: “I was worried that if any other allegations were made it would reignite a police investigation. I was told quite categorically that any past indecency matters would not be taken further.” Carey said the senior CPS official told him: “As far as we are concerned he has resigned. He is out of it. We are not going to take anything any further.” Whilst serving as Archbishop of Canterbury, Carey wrote to the director of public prosecutions and the chief constable of Gloucester police, to say that Ball was suffering “excruciating pain and spiritual torment”.[46] He has repeatedly asserted that he was not trying to influence the outcome of the investigation.

    WTF is ‘spiritual torment’?
    Bastard should be in klink with Peter Ball, they could attend to each others……….Er..Needs,

  4. Trevor Blake says:

    “Express a community which strives to be accepting of diversity and inclusive.” (And therefore one of us is erased)

    “It became necessary to destroy the town to save it.”

    Spot the contradiction. There may be two.

  5. Dawkstein says:

    Carey … a two faced, lying, bitter, dishonest bigotted, homophobic, elitist, ponced up, self loving, over blown, psuedo intellect, halfwit shite hawk creep. There, they made me say it. Carey … defender of at least one child raping cleric and best buddy of the intellectual and moral weaking Charlie Windsor.

    How I ache for a British Secular Republic … to be freed from the parasitic synergy of the Church of England and the usurping house of Hanover.

    Yes yes yes, echoes of the great Christopher Hitchens there but what is wrong with that.

  6. Paul says:

    I love the quote from the Torygraph.
    Beautiful and so apt – of it, all those who work for it penning their prose for the higher wealthy mob to savour and fawn and regurgitate, over their gin and tonics when down at the ‘club, the church they so wish to ‘defend’, the ‘hierarchy’ of blind ungrateful fools that so demand obedience.
    It was Churchill who said :
    A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.”

    Touché.

  7. StephenJP says:

    Well, I have no time for the Christian Institute, and very little for Lord Carey-and-Sharey; but I have even less for snowflakes who think the only way to express their opposition to others’ views is to try to expunge them from history. I doubt whether many of these people have bothered to find out what Carey’s current views are on LGBT issues; but when they do, and if they still oppose them, the answer is to argue against them, not demand that they, and he, be obliterated.

  8. Cali Ron says:

    StephenJP: “…the answer is to argue against them, not demand that they, and he, be obliterated.” A bit hyperbolic, don’t you think? They took down 1 picture of him. Not even close to obliteration. In fact, the college claims that his views and the campaign against him had nothing to do with the pictures removal (???), so maybe you should direct your ire at the college.

    A quick google search found no evidence that he has changed his views towards LBGT issues.

  9. barriejohn says:

    The question is: should he be celebrated as a former alumnus? I know what my view on that would be, and I’m really rather surprised at his inclusion in the first place!

  10. John says:

    I don’t go for the faux accusations of “bullying” but I do wonder about excluding people because they hold views that may no longer be popular or main-stream.
    There is, to my mind, a worrying trend to exclude people and views that do not fit in with current accepted norms.
    Historically, we have progressed because we have tolerated different views and ideas.
    If we shut this down, do we all not end up being the poorer for having done so?
    Admittedly, some lines have to be drawn, i.e. racist and supremacist ideologies, especially if accompanied by hateful speech or incitements towards violent conduct.
    I never thought much of Carey and he has a supreme gift of opening his whinging mouth and putting his foot all the way down it.
    Let him carry on, I say.
    The more such idiots spout their nonsense, the more will reasonable people reject them and their silly views.

  11. Stuart H. says:

    Jules Gomes is no longer an Anglican minister. In fact, he’s been banned from holding any position in the Anglican church for 10 years or from claiming to do so. See http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/isle-of-man-news/dr-gomes-handed-10-year-ban-from-anglican-church-1-8302427 . It says something when even I agree with the judgement of a bunch of over-privileged parasites whose malign influence over my neighbourhood I’ve been fighting for years.

    See also http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/isle-of-man-news/town-sermon-not-appropriate-1-6886645 to get a taste of why even his fellow priests couldn’t wait to get rid of him.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *