Pages

Sunday, 20 December 2009

Green out-Greens Green

Stephen “Birdshit” Green has outdone even Stephen “Birdshit” Green this time.

He actually supports the death penalty for gays as laid out in Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill.

Green – who heads some potty little outfit called Christian Voice, which gets more than its fair share of publicity when people who don’t get airtime and column inches have more important and interesting things to say – is reported in a story in Wales on Sunday to have said, “As a Christian I agree with the death penalty and I don’t see why infecting someone with HIV should be treated in any other way than if you killed someone with a knife. It is extraordinary to think it is OK to infect someone else with HIV and get away with it.”

How about infecting people with views such as yours, you bloody moron?

Britain’s laws, says this excuse for a human being, “promote perversion” because they do not make homosexuality a criminal offence, and capital punishment is OK because God ordains it in the Bible.

Oh, yeah? Who told you that, then. Well, the Bible did. Inerrant, is it? Yes. How do you know? Because it’s the word of God. How do you know that, then? Well, the Bible says so . . .

One commenter says under that story, “Any individual who can prove that being taught as a youngster the messages this evil man is creating, has caused emotional, psychological, and/or physical harm, should be supported in seeking legal redress.

“Likewise any person who is harmed in any way by another person acting in faith in Mr Green’s teachings should also be encouraged to seek redress from Mr Green.”

No comments:

Post a Comment

We welcome lively and challenging comments. However, please try to stay on topic, be polite and do not use abusive, racist or sexist language, and do not incite your readers to violence or other antisocial behaviour, or your comment will be deleted. This isn't censorship: it's a case of staying within the bounds of decency and having an eye to the law, although we realise the law will be different in different countries.

We do not bar anonymous comments at the moment, but we would prefer that those commenting play fair and use their name or at least a regular nom de plume. It does show a confidence in your convictions. We know, too, that it's easy to use a false name and be effectively anonymous, but, again, we appeal to your sense of good practice. Even a wacky nom de plume is better, since at least readers will come to know that contributor and maybe remember her or his previous comments.

Blatant commercial advertising will be removed.

Comments should not be construed as necessarily the policy or opinion of the Pink Triangle Trust.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.