A Nation of Wimps

Political correctness has inevitably dragged us down to a level where our forebears would regard us as a nation of mincing softies lacking any kind of courage or backbone. We can't be far off the end game now. We have the sorry situation where the British Army is targeting gays and ethnic minorities because the army should be 'representative of the current demographic'. Bullshit. I don't care about the army representing the current populace, I just want the best army possible to defend our country be that 100% white, black, gay or heterosexual. We should be recruiting the very best not targeting those we misguidedly believe to be under represented.

Meanwhile the peasants on social media are targeting Ann Widdecombe with pitchforks at the ready and no doubt a pyre prepared ready to burn the heretic. Her sin? She declared her belief that Prince Harry's bride to be would be trouble for the royal family with her background. Fair enough if that's what you believe. But the peasant uprising was triggered by cries of racism. Yes, our old friend racism has reared its head yet again for no apparent reason other than the racial obsession of the politically correct. Markle describes herself as being mixed race as her mother has a shot of African in her ancestry somewhere. So in these strange times in which we live criticising somebody who describes themselves as mixed race is racism. But all intelligent, rational people know it isn't.

What started me on this post was actually a radio programme I heard last week when driving from Lancashire to Sussex. It was the Jeremy Vine Show on BBC Radio 2. Yes, I know, I should have swapped channels but it was my equivalent of rubber necking as I pass a terrible accident, it was so bad I had to carry on and couldn't bear the idea of switching channels. When I was studying for my degree there was an option to study TV and film history which I resisted for a long time thinking it was the History (my degree) equivalent of media studies. In the end I gave in and really enjoyed studying films such as The Battleship Potemkin and TV series such as Play For Today. TV and film really are excellent pointers to the times in which they were made and the prevailing cultural and political environment. Last week's radio experience says everything about our new status as a nation of wimps, in years to come people will be shocked at how we let this happen to us.

First up was a woman called Clare Pooley, aka 'Sober Mummy'. If I told you she thought that shortening her pseudonym to 'SM' was a little racy you may get an idea where this is going. Apparently she is an internet phenomenon after giving up booze and blogging about it prior to finally leaving her alias behind and writing a book under her real name. I was immediately drawn in as I work in the 'hospitality industry' and quite enjoy a tipple myself.

So as I hit the M6 toll road I tuned in and heard how her life had been running out of control and she was knocking back booze every night after she had put her offspring to bed just to unwind. But the problem got worse and worse and began to take control of her. The tension mounted and I was having visions of her hiding bottles of whisky, rum and assorted other spirits around the house and eventually necking a bottle of White Lightening for breakfast.  Like me Jeremy Vine must have been desperate to know how bad her addiction was. When pressed she owned up. She was necking a bottle of wine a day, sometimes two at weekends. What a fucking let down, one bottle of wine a day and sometimes two at weekends does not an alcoholic make.

When I was growing up I knew blokes who'd have six pints of beer on their way home from work, guzzle a bottle wine with their evening meal then go out for a few pints after that. The father of a friend of mine, who actually was an alcoholic, used to insist on putting the milk bottles out at night as the rest of the family went to bed. He had a bottle of whisky stashed in the garden and would have a slug or three as he put the bottles out. That's a drink problem.

Clare Pooley is just  another whining, middle class mum claiming victim status and doing a great disservice to people who have been in the absolute gutter of life due to alcoholism and turned their lives around. They're the people I admire and respect. I'm afraid she'll have to kick a habit that involves imbibing a lot more than a bottle of wine a day to get my admiration and respect.

The UN Says: "Be Happy You Miserable Bastards!"

If ever we needed a reminder of what a fatuous waste of time and money the United Nations is today is it. Today is the UN's International Day of Happiness so smile you git, including you lot over there in North Korea. Come on ISIS, put that cutlass down and instead of beheading that Christian, get him guffawing with a good, old fashioned Syrian, Iraqi and Iranian joke. Come on West Africa, stop worrying about Ebola for a day and get each other giggling. Vanuatu? Lighten up, you'll soon be looking back on the last fortnight and the only thing you'll remember is the UN making you happy today.

Then a few days back we had that grand old queen of England Elton John throwing yet another temper tantrum and calling for an international boycott of Dolce and Whatsit. Why was he in such an emotional state? Dolce and Whatsit, or Dolce or Whatsit maybe, had said that IVF was synthetic and that adoption should be restricted to traditional families, a man and a woman. Of course dare question the self-obsessed godmother of lifestyle and you cross the world's great and good, well, Posh Beckham and bloated, coke snorting, retired Argentinian football cheat Maradonna. (Think you'll find that's Madonna. Ed.) Yes the usual suspects who think it's cool to have a little mascot like Elton John to fawn and grovel over jumped on the bandwagon. Surprised they didn't get the Ouija board out for a quick quote from Liz Taylor.

Quite clearly IVF, by definition, is synthetic. Fact Elton, get over it you sad little git. As for adoption. Well I'm with Dolce and Whatsit on that one too. To be perfectly honest having seen and read so much about Elton John I can't imagine anybody less suitable to be a parent. But he typifies modern Britain, dare to disagree about something, especially regarding the current politically correct orthodoxy, and you fall head first into a shit storm of epic proportions, especially if it's concerning race or sexuality.

Yesterday I fell into my very own shit storm. It wasn't epic, it was a bit limp wristed coming from a Green Party tree hugger who I suspect hadn't eaten his lentils. I had the temerity on an internet forum to suggest that David Coburn, UKIP's MEP for Scotland, was guilty of nothing worse than stupidity when he said that he called Scottish politician Humza Yousaf, jokingly, Abu Hamza. It seems that because both are of similar ethnicity but one is a convicted terrorist this is racist. As I was defending Coburn, while calling him stupid (yes I know) said tree hugger then told me that I too am clearly a 'racist'. I told said Green Party weirdo that he was clearly a twat and promptly blocked him.

Two examples of how oppressive and anti free speech political correctness really is. Disagree with the politically correct and they hunt you down and, in the case of Elton John, will try to damage your business. In my case it was a dickhead using 'racist' as a term of abuse. In fact 'racist' is a word that is so misused today it is effectively meaningless.

As for the UN International Day of Happiness. About as interesting as the eclipse which seems to have only served to give saddoes in the media some sort of weird pseudo-sexual stimulation. The moon's crossing between us and the sun, big deal. I can stand on the station car park and when a truck goes up Warton Road it blocks my view of the Co-Op. Same thing surely?

Have a good weekend.

Racism and Homophobia-Two Sides of the Same Coin

Had a couple of weeks in France, which was very enjoyable and pleasantly free of politically correct bullshit. I'm not sure whether that's because the French are too sensible to fall for political correctness or whether the language barrier just insulated us from it, either way it was very refreshing.

But no sooner do we return to Blighty than the onslaught of self-indulgent bollocks from the militant gay and race lobbies smacks us in the chops like a swipe across the head from a fat, slimy, smelly piece of fish.

First we heard some very successful black businesswoman, who made a mint in the City of London, whining on about breaking down the racial barriers in the UK. Tripe, she probably whines on about that notice in some idiots window in Notting Hill in the 1950s warning off blacks, dogs and Irish. Militant racial equality obsessives actually do more harm to the cause of community relations than the BNP ever could. Most people don't give a toss about somebody's ethnicity but do get pissed off at the likes of Lee Jasper and Diane Abbott who seem obsessed with race.

Then there is the slightly more recent phenomenon of homophobia in football. Forgive me but bollocks! Stonewall are having hissy fits because so many football clubs are refusing to be dictated to by them and are refusing to wear rainbow coloured bootlaces. It seems wearing rainbow laces would stop all that homophobia in football. What a load of fatuous crap.

But they never tell us what this homophobia consists of, or the racism in football the politically correct bang on about ad nauseam. A player was found not guilty of racism this week we are told. But we are not told what he was supposed to have said. They never do give examples because I doubt they exist. And there are probably people being offensive all the time about something or other, maybe race, sexuality maybe weight, accent or whatever, for God's sake grow a backbone and get on with life.

I don't think most people in this country care about whether somebody is gay or heterosexual. I don't think most people in this country spend a great deal of time obsessing and talking about their sexuality. I think most people in this country are extremely tolerant. But when the militant gay lobby constantly bangs on about their sexuality, day after day, constantly and unremittingly, it does eventually get on the tits of most people in this country. Just get on with you life, sex and sexuality are actually a small part of a balanced, healthy life, not the be all and end all.

So I conclude that anti racism campaigners and gay rights campaigners are two sides of the same coin. While the majority of gays and minorities get on with life to varying degrees of happiness and success the militant minority bang on, and on, and on very often using their race or sexuality to excuse their own personal failings and inadequacies. 

Breaking Down Communities

Everything about political correctness and the modern obsession with 'equality' seems designed to divide communities and pit one group against another. Talk of community and society is cheap when we seem to be living in an era when disparate groups seem to think that we should all adapt our lives to suit them. It seems to be the tyranny of the minorities.

The horrific Harriet Harman has been at it again recently whining on about women only shortlists for parliamentary elections. David Cameron's been whining about there not being enough women in the Cabinet too. Personally I don't care what sex my MP is, as long as he/she is capable of doing a job. If I was faced with a candidate from a women only shortlist that would guarantee that particular candidate didn't receive my vote.

Then we have disability groups expecting the whole world to adapt on the off chance that a person with a particular disability is inconvenienced. I have every sympathy for people with disabilities, having worked for medical charities much of my working life, but there are far too many people working for disability groups, especially disability rights/pressure groups, who have a vested interest in constantly preaching at people. They are making good livings from doing it.

I have every sympathy with disabled people and have campaigned for disabled access to buildings etc. An example of the extreme I distrust was a case when I worked for a London charity a few years back. We had held an annual event in a particular venue and had spent many months with the management committee planning the event that particular year. A disabled person on the committee had taken part in the planning. But on the day he turned up, with a local newspaper journalist, and made a big deal about not being able to get in without assistance. We could have used a fully accessible venue and told the original venue why we had moved venue. But he wanted to be seen as a martyr.

Then there is the disproportionate amount of political influence gained by the militant gay lobby. Any criticism of gay people or gay lifestyle and the critic is branded homophobic. Catholic adoption agencies have been forced to close down because they would not place children with gay couples. The word 'marriage' has been redefined because gay people want to get 'married'. The whole of the population, it seems, has to change to accommodate the wishes of the militant gay lobby.

Racial politics is the obvious great divider. Criticise Islam and you're an 'islamophobe'. Criticise the levels of immigration and you're a 'xenophobe'. No place for rational debate, just stifle argument  branding opponents 'phobic'.

So here's one to ponder. I heard a black comedian on a comedy panel show having to say what reason she  had been given that  father Chritmas didn't exist. Her mother told her it was because she didn't want a fat white man with a beard taking credit for the presents she'd bought. I can't help wondering if that had been a white comedian talking about a black figure that she would have been branded racist.

David Morris MP and Gay Marriage

I received a letter this weekend from my MP, David Morris, informing me that he had consulted widely and would be voting against gay marriage in the House of Commons today. I had contacted him some time ago to ask his position, so credit where it's due, he has consulted and listened. Shame he didn't on the question of an EU referendum, but eh, that's life.

There is still a problem though. On what issues should an MP have a core belief that will not be shaken? If MPs merely consult, then go along with public opinion then why not get rid of them and just have referenda? If I ask a candidate what his views are on a range of issues I want to know what his views are, not what public opinion is. Otherwise, how do we decide who to vote for? There are times when an MP must surely vote with conviction, even if it means going against public opinion, he must then justify himself to the electorate and either keep or lose his seat.

So I'm glad my MP will be voting against gay marriage today. But he still won't get my vote come the next election.

The Trouble With Political Parties

There's a bit of a kerfuffle in UKIP at the moment where there appears to be one of their regular purges going on. Those being chucked out in this current round of blood letting are those who have publicly backed the idea of 'gay marriage', which UKIP opposes.

I oppose 'gay marriage', although I believe that gay couples should have the same legal rights and protection as heterosexual couples. I oppose it on the grounds that marriage is between a man and a woman. I do  not believe that to be homophobic in any way, although the usual emotionally incontinent obsessives elsewhere on t'internet have called me, and others with similar views, homophobes.

However, I do believe that political parties should allow some leeway on issues of conscience such as this, and that UKIP have over-reacted, as they usually do. Why Cameron is so obsessed with this issue, which few other people in the country feel is of vital national importance, we can only guess. So I do not understand why any political party should force members out over the issue.

What it really shows is how dehumanising political parties have become. Yes there is a need for discipline, but there should also be room for debate and dissent, within reason. On any matter of conscience individual members should be free to take up their own position, especially on issues such as this, capital punishment, abortion, euthanasia and similar. The public are sick of hearing party spokesmen just parrot the party line, they want real human beings who can think for themselves. Sadly when independent thinkers surface in a political party they are all too often hounded out.

Gay Marriage

It seems that Cameron's social democrat government is determined to alienate as many people in the country as possible. Lately we've had the fiasco of the PCC elections which 80% of the population couldn't be mithered getting involved with.

Now they are determined, despite a total lack of interest from the populace at large be they gay or straight, to redefine marriage. Yet things that do concern the public, such as the EU, are completely ignored. I suppose as this government has no mandate they have no reason to worry what the electorate want or believe.

On the question of 'gay marriage' there is a wonderful article by Brendan O'Neill in Spiked Online. A must read I would say.

Nick Clegg And The Lib Dem Bigots

The Liberal Democrats make me sick, especially little Nicky Clegg. Do we really expect the Deputy Prime Minister to behave like a tantrum throwing, attention seeking teenager?

He has now called those of us who oppose gay marriage 'bigots'. How very grown up. But of course, in true Lib Dem fashion, he withdrew the remarks when he saw the damning reaction when he circulated advance copies of his speech. Why do people like Clegg assume that those who disagree with them are 'bigots' or worse?

For what it's worth I firmly believe that marriage is an institution for a man and a woman. Further than that I do not believe it to be my business, or anybody else's, what consenting adults do together in the bedroom. That does not make me a bigot Mr Clegg. 

Police-The Final Insult

South Yorkshire Police have shown their utter contempt for the public by threatening to take bobbies off the beat and replace them with PCSOs. Let's be honest, these ideas are always approved at the top of government before 'being floated' and show what contempt the police and government hold the populace in. If it happens in South Yorkshire it will soon be happening elsewhere, that's how our masters work things.

The public have been demanding more bobbies on the beat for years and years. So now our masters want to withdraw beat bobbies completely. If that isn't showing contempt I don't know what is. As for PCSOs I wouldn't ask one for directions to a car park let alone trust one on the beat. What next, replace the riot police with PCSOs?

And I don't accept all this bull about spending cuts when £50,000 of lottery money is being wasted in Burnley on:

A PROJECT looking at the history of the LGBT movement in Burnley....

From the Lancashire Telegraph.

Gay Marriage And Homophobia

I've had a restless day today, for various reasons and have followed in the media with interest some of the debate around 'gay marriage', especially in relation to Cardinal O'Brien's comments. What has struck me quite forcefully is the pure venom and intolerance of so many in the gay lobby towards anybody who disagrees with them, especially those with a religious position. The minute somebody disagrees with the concept of 'gay marriage' they are dismissed as 'homophobes' as if they are incapable of rational thought. I have heard Cardinal O'Brien described as 'evil' today and the Catholic church attacked as 'hateful' and 'full of paedophiles'. In fact if the vile attacks on the Catholic church I've heard today were used about a race or about gay people the abuser would be pretty promptly charged with a hate crime.

For the record I oppose the concept of 'gay marriage'. Marriage is between a man and a woman, it's that simple. On the other hand I have no problem with civil partnerships for gay people, but let's not pretend that marriage can suddenly become something it is not, that is fundamentally dishonest.  That is not homophobic, it is just a clearly logical position and in fairness, I have heard a couple of more rational gay people making that point themselves today.

The problem with the militant political gay lobby is that they are so strident they actually create a negative response from many people who may otherwise be tolerant, if not sympathetic. As with any overly strident campaigning group on any issue they lose the middle ground.

Take the case of gay adoption. The power of the gay lobby is such that adoption agencies that would not, on grounds of conscience, place children with gay couples have been closed down. There is no tolerance of people who, on grounds of conscience, could not place a child with a gay couple. I wouldn't place a child with a gay couple, but neither would I close down agencies that do place children with gay couples. I would actually like to be allowed to make the decision myself and not be pilloried as some kind of extreme gay hater, which I am not. I just believe that children need a mother and a father.

It seems to me that as a nation we are becoming slaves to minority pressure groups, and the silent majority are being increasingly attacked and in some cases oppressed, especially those who describe themselves as Christians.

More On Adrian Smith, Oppressed Christian

I'll give the politically correct their due, they really do manage to offend everybody, regardless of race, ethnicity blah, blah, blah.

I remember a few years ago a council in East Lancashire harassing a woman who had a piggy bank on her window sill in case it offended Muslims en route to the mosque. I remember seeing an Imam interviewed at the time telling us how his Muslim congregation had found the council's action deeply patronising and offensive.

Now Trafford Housing Trust have united gays, Christians and most rational people in opposition to their victmisation of a Christian employee for daring to express his views on gay marriage.

It now transpires that the Trust acted against him because they were scared of losing the formal approval of an organisation that helps young gay people find housing. Stalin is alive and well after all it seems.

Full story at the Christian Institute.

Gays and the BBC

The BBC has commissioned a report that says it is doing a good job portraying gay people, but could do more.

Personally I'm sick to death of the BBC's obsession with sex and sexuality, be that gay or otherwise. Do the people at the BBC really think that the population is as obsessed with sexuality as they evidently are?

I can't help wondering how gay people feel about their portrayal by the media, almost as if they are a product to be promoted rather than human beings who live lives pretty much as boring and run of the mill as the rest of us, until they close the bedroom door.

On the one hand the media promote people like Alan Carr and Graham Norton as the latter day John Inman and Larry Grayson, I won't mention the ultra camp little dancer with the terrible lisp who pops up on comedy panel shows while being not in the least funny. Almost Carry On style caricatures.

On the other hand they disproportionately promote homosexual tyrant and bigot Peter Tatchell. He who, amongst other things, loves to 'out' famous gay people whether they want to be 'outed' or not. Anybody who dares disapprove of his orthodoxy is treated with a pink Hitler style attack of hatred and venom. Don't expect to be tolerated when you are so incredibly intolerant of others. Surely 'hate crimes' work both ways, or they should.

The best thing the BBC can do, and the Labour Party come to that, is drop their politically correct obsession with sexuality. It was their obsession with race and perceived racism that encouraged the rise of the BNP, they do everybody a similar disservice obsessing about sexuality.

Gay Marriage

It seems that the new British government, or the coalition government as it is constantly referred to, is carrying on where the old one left off. Rather than scrapping the equality apparatus that causes so much resentment they have put Lynne Featherstone in charge. The only thing worse than a patronising Lib Dem interfering and trying to equalise, is a patronising Lib Dem called Lynne Featherstone being in charge.

They are now talking about forcing the introduction of a religious element into civil partnership ceremonies. It is odd for two reasons in my view. Many religions do not accept homosexuality and I doubt that gay couples would choose to have an element of a religion that condemns homosexuality in their civil ceremony anyway. Secondly If a religion that is fully accepting of homosexual relationships wants to conduct a civil partnership, or a marriage, then why did the existing legislation disallow it?

This shows why state approved equality is a joke. Just leave people to get on with things. All couples in relationships should have the same legal rights under the law, end of story. But if one religion is happy to bless a relationship fine, if another religion is not prepared to bless a relationship then that is their right. It has bugger all to do with the state.

Homophobia and Football

I was unfortunate enough to catch the headline in the Independent this morning as I went out to buy my preferred morning newspaper, which is not the Independent or The Grauniad. The headline that caught my eye was "Football accused in homophobia row". Now I'm a football fanatic and take offence at being accused in this way by a rag like the Independent, because as a supporter I am certainly tarred with the Independent's brush (hope that's not seen as racist).

Isn't this the newspaper that takes pride in attacking people for blanket attacks such as 'the French smell of garlic' or 'old peope smell of wee' or 'Muslims are terrorists'. Making sweeping statements like that is wicked and to be discouraged, unless it is made by the politicaly correct against its enemies it seems.

So the truth is that the FA wants to make a video against homophobia but certain players and their agents said they didn't want to take part. Hence they are homophobic, indeed not just those who said 'no' but the whole of football, meaning Wayne Rooney, the women's football teams and little Tommy kicking a ball around in his under-9s team in the local park.

But why do they want to make a video against homophobia? Well, like the politically correct in all things they reach a conclusion, usually aimed at dividing and ruling, then set out to justify their conclusion. In the Independent piece they cite the case of Justin Fashanu as galloping homophobia in football. They claim that, as one of the first openly gay players, he was driven to suicide in 1998 by taunts and prejudice. Forgive me but he went to play and coach in the USA after his career here ended, not discriminated aganst there on grounds of sexuality. He committed suicide after allegations of sexual offences against a 17 year old boy in his care in the States. Tragedy yes, homophobia I doubt.

I am aware of more cases of footballers involved in domestic abuse than of players, or indeed fans, being involved in homophobic incidents. I am unaware though, of the FA making a video against that. I am also aware that the FA have somebody called Peter Clayton, who chairs the FA's Homophobia in Football advisory group and is the FA's only openly gay councillor. Homophobia didn't stop him getting on in football did it? I wonder who chairs the FA's Domestic Violence in Football advisory group?

I have heard that one senior Manchester United player is rumoured to be gay. There have been absolutely no taunts from the terraces and no sick comments in bars that I am aware of.

Contrast that with the treatment of John Terry for having an affair with a woman. He has received some vile abuse in games since his affair was exposed. I look forward to watching the FA's anti-heterophobia video soon.

Authoritarian Tyranny

Just as Christians are persecuted by authoritarian tyrants all over the world, so we are in the UK.

If a registrar has a deeply held belief that civil partnerships are wrong why can their view, on religious and moral grounds, not be tolerated. After all there must be any number of registrars who would do the ceremony.

Similarly with gay adoption. Catholic agencies are closing down because the state dictates that they must allow gay adoption against the fundamental tenets of the Catholic faith. Again there are any number of adoption agencies that will happily become involved in gay adoption.

What happened to religious tolerance? What happened to respecting the views of minorities? What happened to freedom of conscience? What happened to freedom of choice?

From the BBC.

One To Avoid

The Tories are out to show how trendy and hip they are at their conference this year, by having a gay disco. They are even turning the party logo into a gay rainbow thing.

I suppose they'll all turn up in rainbow coloured cravats and pink satin pants.


It's sad but the Tories always make themselves look ridiculous when they try to be cool and trendy. In my experience you are either cool and trendy or not, you can't just become either.

And how can they organise a 'gay disco' when attacking the National Black Police Association. Surely one is racist the other sexist?

Wonder where they'll be holding the hetero disco?

Jonathan Ross-Again!

Poor old Jonathan Ross is being attacked again, it's perhaps a symptom of the creeping fascism of political correctness. Dare to make a joke about an imaginary gay teenage son and up pop the PC brigade full of (im)moral outrage. Here's one report of the latest fuss concerning 'Wossy':

Jonathan Ross is under fire again after suggesting parents should put their sons up for adoption if they wanted a Hannah Montana MP3 player.

A number of listeners complained to the broadcasting watchdog, claiming the comments on his Radio 2 show on Saturday were homophobic.

Ross, 48, was involved in a light-hearted discussion about prizes in a competition themed around the fictional teen pop star when he joked: "If your son asks for a Hannah Montana MP3 player, you might want to already think about putting him down for adoption before he brings his...erm...partner home."

A spokeswoman for Ofcom was unable to say how many people had complained but said: "We have had complaints. We are assessing those complaints against the broadcasting code."

Listener Karen Mills told Pink News: "How can these people earn such huge sums of public money to come out with this discriminatory rubbish?

"What would be the message to a young gay man listening to this? Worse still, how might such comments reinforce and support homophobic bullying in the playground?"

Ross has not been far from controversy in the past year, only returning to the airwaves in January after being involved in the Andrew Sachs lewd phone calls row.

The BBC suspended him for 12 weeks without pay in October after he and fellow DJ Russell Brand left obscene messages on Sachs' answerphone, which were broadcast on Radio 2. The two presenters said Brand had slept with the Fawlty Towers actor's granddaughter, Georgina Baillie, and joked that Sachs might kill himself.

Ross walked straight back into controversy on his radio show after his suspension was lifted, by joking about having sex with an elderly woman.

A BBC spokeswoman said: "The BBC has received four complaints about Jonathan's comments on Saturday's show. However, these off-the-cuff remarks were made purely in jest and were not intended to be offensive. Jonathan is not homophobic in any sense and never meant for his comments to be taken seriously."

I think the last paragraph says it all really. The miltant gay lobby needs to practice some of the tolerance it ignorantly accuses the rest of the population of lacking.

I don't think many people have a problem with homosexuality these days. What people do tend to have a problem with is anybody, gay or straight, lacking a sense of humour, such as Karen Mills.

They also dislike the constant harping on about their sexuality of militant gays whose lives seem to centre exclusively on their sexuality. A truly rounded person wouldn't whine on constantly about their homosexuality and certainly wouldn't be offended by humorous remarks such as those made by Jonathan Ross.

Forsooth, the ladies do protest too much!

A Bishop I Won't Be Bashing!

A heartfelt thanks to Bishop of Lancaster the Reverend Patrick O'Donoghue.

Some time ago he warned the Catholic Caring Services in the diocese that if they complied with the government's authoritarian 'Sexual Orientation Regulations' they would no longer be recognised by the diocese. That has now happened. Here is a short piece on it.

It seems that in this age of tolerance and respect for other cultures and lifestyles, that toleration doesn't extend to Roman Catholics, indeed Christians of any church. Why couldn't the government just allow Catholic agencies to quietly point gay couples in the direction of agencies that allow adoption by same-sex couples? Because that would involve tolerating people with other views and beliefs, and that is only allowed if they do not contravene current orthodoxy. Another word that could be used is hypocrisy.

Well done Bishop Patrick for sticking by our faith, showing backbone and moral leadership. You will be missed when you retire in May.

Pope Benedict and Gender

Thank God for the Pope who actually has the courage of his convictions. Interesting that in this article the BBC, as ever, only give reaction from the Pope's detractors such as a man called Vladimir Luxuria who now claims to be a woman. Interestingly Vladimir is now a 'woman' but is probably as feminine as the woman in the states who became a 'man' and then became pregnant.

Somebody suggests in the article that being critical of the blurring of 'genders' encourages people to go out and bash gays or transexuals, if that was the case we would never be critical of anyone or anything. By criticising the Pope are these people encouraging attacks on Roman Catholics?

I think it's time we had a proper debate about the dangers of the feminisation of society, but I would never dream of attacking people because of their sexuality, ultimately it is their choice and their decision, but I don't have to approve of or endorse it.

What I take serious exception to is the present situation where everybody is to be tolerated, unless you happen to be a Christian, then you are up for being attacked and ridiculed. How many times do you see gay men in a march dressed as nuns? Do they not think their behaviour is offensive? There have been continuous attacks on Christianity and other religions in recent years, not least by gay groups, so don't squeal when religious leaders begin to reassert their beliefs.