They were just holding hands, for goodness' sake!

It's good to see school students taking things into their own hands. If a school is to function properly, you don't want them doing it for flimsy reasons, but, when there's a principle at stake, they should take action in the form of mass disobedience. Otherwise, education is lacking in its remit to make students think, as distinct from merely imparting knowledge.

And that means to think for themselves, not allow the (in this case narrow and bigoted) views of teachers to get in the way.

So what was it all about? Well, a couple of girl students were holding hands, and were told to stop it. Anyone would think they'd been feeling each other up.

I recall at my school – too far back for me to care to remember – that I had my arm loosely over the shoulders of another boy, who had his arm round me in a similar casual manner. We were pals. We were told to part by some idiot who has only the flimsiest excuse that it was a few decades ago.

But what are they afraid of? If students were exposing themselves and engaging in face-swallowing snogs in lessons that would be one thing. Holding hands? Arms casually around each other?

So full marks to the students of St Benedict’s Catholic College in Colchester, Essex, England, for showing the teachers what they think of their prurient attitude.

All gays were abused as children, shock, horror!

So, if you are gay you were abused as a child. Hmm.

But you can see what sort of idiotic pillock came up with that one when you see later in the Daily Mail story linked to above that he thinks anyone who leaves Islam should be jailed.

Your words are welcome Dr Williams – but only to a point

Gay Humanists in the UK have welcomed the Archbishop of Canterbury’s condemnation of the murder of Ugandan gay activist David Kato, found bludgeoned to death last week.

The gay- and human-rights community were shocked when Kato – who once went to jail for his campaigning – was found dead in his Kampala home.

Three weeks ago, the 42-year-old campaigner won a court case against the Ugandan magazine Rolling Stone (which has no connection to the music magazine of the same name), which had been publishing the names of gay people and advising readers to inform on them to the police.

Kato had told friends of increased harassment since the court case.

Of his brutal murder, Archbishop Rowan Williams said: “No one should have to live in such fear because of the bigotry of others. Such violence has been consistently condemned by the Anglican Communion worldwide . . . This is a moment to take very serious stock and to address those attitudes of mind which endanger the lives of men and women belonging to sexual minorities.”

However, commenting on behalf of the Pink Triangle Trust (PTT), secretary George Broadhead said: “It is a pity that the Archbishop doesn’t acknowledge that, though they may have condemned violence, his fellow Anglicans’ ‘attitudes of mind’, to use his own words , on LGBT relationships and rights have contributed to this appalling murder and the dire situation for all LGBT people in Uganda.”

Broadhead referred to Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill, proposed by MP David Bahati. He quotes the Anglican Church of Uganda, which has said: “We appreciate the spirit of the Bill’s objective of protecting the family, especially in light of a growing propaganda to influence younger people to accept homosexuality as a legitimate way of expressing human sexuality. We particularly appreciate the objectives of the Bill which seek to provide for marriage in Uganda as contracted only between a man and woman; prohibit and penalise homosexual behaviour and related practices in Uganda as they constitute a threat to the traditional family; prohibit ratification of any international treaties, conventions, protocols, agreements and declarations which are contrary or inconsistent with the provisions of the Act; prohibit the licensing of organizations which promote homosexuality.”

Broadhead asks: “Doesn’t the Archbishop realise that the ‘bigotry of others’, which he refers to, must include members of his own Anglican Church?

“More homophobic bigotry in Uganda has come from US religious ministers like Carl Ellis Jenkins, Lou Engle, and Scott Lively, whose hateful and dangerous anti-LGBT rhetoric and actions must also have contributed in no small measure to the death of David Kato and the hostility of the Ugandan population as a whole. Will the Archbishop of Canterbury condemn them?”

The real Stephen Green

So now we know the real Stephen Green, it seems. He beat his wife, he beat his kids, he made his family's life a misery, according to his ex-wife.

Read all about it, as they say, in this story in the Daily Mail. It's quite a revelation.

Oh, how are the mighty – or, in arch homophobe Green's case, the deluded hypocrites – fallen!

Does this mean we'll be spared his dangerous ranting in future? Let's hope so. Rather, let's hope he's thoroughly discredited in the eyes of his followers, and that they will come to see the light – but not the light that Stephen Green espoused.

Protesting too little

First see our post titled "Protesting too much" on that ridiculous woman Melanie Phillips, who, writing in the Daily Mail, brought out the old canard about how there's a gay agenda and how there's a huge conspiracy to turn our kids gay.

Then read this moving article by Johan Hari in the Independent.

It all speaks for itself, so I'll shut up and let you get on with it. But I'll just ask this: why are so many people protesting too little?

Protesting too much

Is it something in the water supply that makes “journalist” Melanie Phillips of the Daily Mail into the unutterable bitch she is? Is she on some sort of medication that’s rotting her brain?

I ask because she’s at it again, thinking there’s some sort of gay mafia running things, pushing homosexuality down everyone’s throat, insinuating it into every school lesson as part of some huge conspiracy.

I refer you to this piece of “journalism” in yesterday’s issue.

Schoolchildren, she says, “are to be bombarded with homosexual references in maths, geography and science lessons as part of a Government-backed drive to promote the gay agenda.”

Her examples?

“In geography, for example, they will be told to consider why homosexuals move from the countryside to cities. In maths, they will be taught statistics through census findings about the number of homosexuals in the population. In science, they will be directed to animal species such as emperor penguins and sea horses, where the male takes a lead role in raising its young.”

So you can just see the school timetable. Monday, 10 a.m., double period of “Homosexuals moving from countryside to city”. Tuesday, 3 p.m., “The number of homosexuals in the population”. Friday, 11 a.m., “Homosexuality in the animal kingdom”.

We all know that’s not how it is. In all kinds of subjects, real-life situations are used as examples. No doubt racial groups have been used to make points; gender has been used to illustrate statistics; age and other demographics have been used to discuss social issues.

Now, the last time I looked, gays were a part of the community. Is there any reason, then, Ms bloody Phillips, why the gay section of society should not be likewise used?

Sorry, what was that? There is a reason? Oh, what is it, then?

What was that again. This is “all part of the ruthless campaign by the gay rights lobby to destroy the very concept of normal sexual behaviour”?

Oh, I see.

So a group of gay people have lobbied the powers that be, have successfully had gay-related subjects injected into the curriculum, and their whole purpose has been to destroy the concept of “normal” sexual behaviour? Is that it?

And how are you defining “normal”? Just what’s in the majority? What’s natural? Well there are a lot of things that aren’t in the majority (left-handedness, for instance; red-headedness) that you would consider natural. So let’s leave that one out.

That just leaves “natural”. But, if it happens and it’s part of a person’s nature, it’s natural, isn’t it?

OK, I think I’ve gone far enough in picking the flaws in this ridiculous woman’s excuse for an argument. Read it for yourself (it’s linked to above) and then write to the asinine woman and tell her.

On second thoughts, maybe not. She’d probably revel in getting criticism from what she perceives to be the enemy. It would just justify her ridiculous, vicious crusade against people who have as much right as she does to take part in society and enjoy a full natural life in so doing.

Fortunately, people like Melanie sodding Phillips have become caricatures of themselves by going on and on about sexuality – so much so that you wonder what they’re trying to hide. Doesn’t she just make you want to echo Mr Hamlet and say, “The lady doth protest too much, methinks”?

Euro MP thinks it’s OK to ‘turn’ gay men straight

What a dork? But, then, he is an ageing Tory, so maybe we should make allowances. His name’s Roger Helmer, and he’s a member of the European Parliament, and he’s tweeted that, if it’s OK to do sex-change ops, why not “turn” gay people straight?

He’s come in for some criticism – notably from members of his own party in the Conservative gay group LGBTory.

Meanwhile, according to Pink News, a Christian therapist may be struck off for trying to “turn” a gay man straight. The story’s here.

Gay marriage: not revolutionary, just next

What a refreshing headline! The Washington Post says simply, “Gay marriage isn’t revolutionary. It’s just next.”

The story opens: “Opponents of same-sex marriage worry that allowing two men or two women to wed would radically transform a time-honored institution. But they’re way too late on that front. Marriage has already been radically transformed – in a way that makes gay marriage not only inevitable, as Vice President Biden described it in an interview late last year, but also quite logical.”

Quite!

Attitudes to religion

The gay Humanist charity the Pink Triangle Trust (PTT) – this blog’s parent body – has warmly welcomed the findings about religion in the latest British Social Attitudes survey which was published in December 2010.

The British Social Attitudes survey is the primary social research survey in Britain. The annual surveys conducted by the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen) have continually monitored and interpreted the British public’s changing attitudes towards social, economic, political, religious and moral issues.

As usual, the latest survey asks people whether they regard themselves as belonging to any particular religion and, if so, to which one? When the survey first asked these questions in 1985, 63% of the respondents answered that they were Christians, compared with 34% who said they had no religion (the rest belonged to non-Christian religions). Now, a quarter of a century on, the latest survey has found that only 42% say they are Christians while 51% say they have no religion.

The PTT Secretary George Broadhead commented: “These findings constitute a steady and remarkable turnaround and demonstrate quite clearly that the country has become much less religious and more secular in its outlook. Nevertheless, the powers that be, including politicians and the media (especially the BBC), choose to ignore the findings and continue to give special privileges to the Churches and other religious institutions as if they had overwhelming support.

“Why is it that Anglican bishops sit in the House of Lords as of right, that morning worship of a broadly Christian character is mandatory in state schools, that faith schools are steadily being increased by the government at taxpayers’ expense, and that chaplains provide counselling in our hospitals, prisons and armed forces with no provision made for the majority who are not religious?

“It is high time that politicians and the media took note, not just of these highly significant statistics, but of the words of no less a person that the Queen, our Head of State, when (in a recent speech to the Church of England’s General Synod) she said: ‘It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue and that the wellbeing and prosperity of the nation depend on the contribution of individuals and groups of all faiths and none.’ ”

What’s in a name?

The lane from chez nous in rural Wales leading up to the nearby village

Greetings, and a happy Christmas, all! No, I don’t balk at using the word “Christmas”. What, as the Bard asked through Juliet, is in a name? That which we call a festival by any other name would be as merry – potentially, anyway.

I’m no apologist for Christianity. I recognise its role in Western history and what it has brought, culturally, to our way of life and the language we use. I also recognise that, without it, other influences would have come to bear, but humankind would still have built its moral code, because a moral code comes not from a religion, but from humanity.

That people attribute their moral code to their Christianity or their Islam or their Hinduism or whatever is entirely up to them, and that may be the top layer, as it were, of the articulation of what is their code of ethics and mode of living.

Beneath it, though, is that thing humanity. It was the human in us that devised the religion that in turn codified our outer persona, the one we present to the world, the principles we live by. Most people are probably essentially good, but with flaws. Some are essentially bad, but are so because of their belief in religion’s edicts and diktats.

Some, of course, are just bad. I have a few politicians in mind, but let’s not go down that road, tempting though it may be.

That said, if people find comfort in a belief system and don’t wish to dictate how others should live their lives, I’m OK with that.

So I’m no apologist for Christianity, but it’s given its name to the midwinter festival that punctuates the seemingly relentless darkness and (in the UK at the moment) coldness and misery of winter, and brings us hope of a new season on the way. Bit of a laugh in the UK, of course, where we don’t seem to get proper summers any more, but there you go.

I’m not one to go about saying “Happy holidays!” or “Happy Yuletide!” It would make be seem a bigger prat than I already am. So it’s “Merry Christmas and happy New Year!” That’s the expectation, and those who know me know that I use the term “Christmas” as a descriptor. Saying the word doesn’t make people believe more in the mythology.

I leave it to my learned blogging colleague George Broadhead, secretary of this blog’s parent, the Pink Triangle Trust, to tell us the true origin of Christmas, though.

Atheists, agnostics, Humanists and other unbelievers are sometimes asked why they celebrate at Christmas time, or are even accused of being hypocritical for doing so.

The answer is that they celebrate at that time for the same reason as the early Christians – because everyone else was already doing so, and had been for centuries before the birth of Christ.

The last two weeks of December had long been a time of celebration throughout the ancient world in the northern hemisphere. It was associated with the Winter Solstice, the shortest day, after which one could look forward to Spring, to crops, regeneration and new life.

Almost all the customs of the Festive Season pre-date Christianity: the giving of gifts, decorating the house and tree, putting up holly and mistletoe, and eating the flaming round plum pudding – the most obvious solar symbol of all. And the familiar crib scene originated in ancient Egypt.

Among the Romans, the Festival of Saturnalia, which began on 17 December, involved the hanging of greenery and laurel leaves, the lighting of candles and the giving of presents. Like the present Festive Season, theirs was a season of goodwill.

In the third century AD there was great rivalry between Christianity and Mithraism, especially among the soldiers, upon whose support the Roman Emperors depended. Eventually, early in the fourth century, the Emperor Constantine decided in favour of Christianity but, during the rivalry, the Christians could not afford to appear killjoys in December when Mithraic soldiers were celebrating the triumph of Good over Evil.

The 25th of December may be attributed to the fact that in the year AD 274, at a time when the Roman emperors were trying to replace the ancient Roman polytheism with sun worship, the Emperor Aurelian declared 25 December to be the Sun’s official birthday.

So those who have no religion (47% according to the British Social Attitudes Survey, January 2010) need have no qualms about celebrating at this time of the year if they wish.

And with that, here’s hoping for happy holidays, happy Winter Solstice, happy Christmas, happy whatever you want to call it to all of Pink Triangle’s readers, and we all hope you have a great New Year.

We’re putting our feet up for the rest of the holiday and will be back with a few choice entries early in the New Year, by which time we may have sobered up a bit.

How the BBC ‘offended’ Christians

Yeah, but where’s the halo?

I’ve been watching The Nativity on BBC1. Not bad as these things go. I like TV drama, and I don’t really care – when a drama is based on myth – which myth the said drama is depicting.

Note the word “myth”. Were it about, say, the ancient Greek pantheon or the stories in the Bhagavad Gita I’d probably still enjoy it – if it were well enough written and performed. The Nativity is OK – not brilliant, but watchable. So I committed four half-hours to watching it.

Now it seems that some Christians don’t like it. That may surprise you, until you learn that it’s because the so-called Virgin Mary is “portrayed” as a whore.

I happened on a Christian website called The Way the other day, and on an undated page one Amanda Hopkins writes a short post beginning: “Christians have reacted angrily to a BBC production which portrayed the Virgin Mary as a prostitute.”

She cites the Daily Express. Whether that was her only source, I can’t say, but just hang onto the word “portrayed” for a moment.

Now see what the Daily Express said on 19 December: “The BBC has angered Christians with a TV drama in which the Virgin Mary is branded a prostitute and sex cheat” (emphasis mine).

I fly no flag for abominable rags such as the Express, but it got it right – in that regard anyway, since we’ll for the moment put aside the notion that the BBC angered Christians, when it was they who chose to be angered (and then it was only Stephen Green and his nutcase Christian Voice outfit).

So you see the sleight of phraseology here. The Way says the production “portrayed” Mary as a whore; the Express says that, within the drama, she was “branded” such. And that’s the way it was: characters branded her a whore and spat on her and threw stones at her.

But such is the myopia of so many Christians and others of the Bewildered Herd that they can’t separate the doings of characters from the intentions of a television network. I left a comment pointing out the misleading nature of the intro, but, predictably, up to the time of writing this it had not been used, yet some that came after had been used.

Chances are that, if there was such a girl who gave birth to the guy who was eventually portrayed as the Messiah, she’d have been bonked by a Roman soldier or passing goatherd. One pundit a few years ago put forward a similar theory, anyway, in a docudrama on TV about Mary.

But it does raise an interesting question: what if she had had a bit of nookie on the side and then found she had a bun in the oven? She would lie about it, probably say she was raped.

And then the entire Christian world would turn out to have been based on one teenage girl’s lame and pathetic excuse for not having kept her hand on her ha’penny when some hunk in a tunic happened by and gave her the wink.

“It was the Archangel Gabriel, Joe, honest. He says I’m carrying the Light of the World in my womb.”

“Oh, all right, then.”

Ratzo goes unchallenged in flagship news prog, NSS not too pleased

The National Secular Society is not a happy bunny today. Understandably, it’s up in arms over the fact that Ratzo the Vile is getting an unchallenged slot tomorrow – Christmas Eve – in Radio 4’s flagship Today programme.

It’s actually in that programme within Today called Thought for the Day, a slot that allows people with weird views to rabbit on about invisible entities, sky fairies and what other people should be doing with their lives.

Ratzo – hot on the heels of his controversial visit to the UK in September – recorded his slot yesterday in the Vatican.

The Daily Mail quotes the NSS’s Terry Sanderson as saying: “The Pope has a lot of questions to answer about the failings of his church and its guilt in covering up child abuse.

“I doubt whether any of this will be addressed in Thought for the Day and nobody will have the opportunity to ask him for clarification.

“Rather than giving the Pope an uninterrupted platform, why won’t he be invited to take the 8.10 interview slot on the Today programme with [anchor] John Humphrys to ask the awkward questions that the Vatican constantly sweeps under the table? Instead we’ll just get the usual whitewash and the Pope rewriting history.”

But, then, the BBC’s director general, Mark Thompson, is one of the more prominent members of the Bewildered Herd – and a devout Catholic to boot. He had a cosy little visit to the Vatican in February, where it’s believed this dodgy little deal was born.

If any ever doubts that religion gets privileges, this ought to put them straight. One of the most controversial figures in the world gets to speak in what is often a hard-news programme and not one question will be put to the evil bastard.

Another Tory is gay – but it was an open secret

So Tory MP Nigel Evans is gay, eh? It comes as no surprise, because I’ve known it for some time. And his constituency party in Ribble Valley, England, have been telling him to jump out of the closet for quite a while, it seems.

The thing is, dear old Nige used to vote against gay law reform. He voted against the lowering of the age of consent, although he did get better when it came to votes on such things.

Some years ago, when I was editing the print edition of Gay & Lesbian Humanist magazine, we came by an online claim that he was among several MPs who were gay, who were voting against gay equality, and who were still in the closet. He was one of them.

As I recall, the website either withdrew the entire claim or subtracted the names. I didn’t use any names, either, in the news story I wrote – a decision based on journalistic judgement.

But there was Nige.

I sat in his flat in Swansea a few years ago as a radio reporter, shoving a microphone under his nose and wondering about him, able to see a bottom corner of his bed through the living-room door, across a corridor and through the open bedroom door. I was wondering at the time whether he shared it with a wife, a girlfriend or a boyfriend.

He was spouting antigay stuff as a county councillor at the time (this was before he got an MP’s job), and there he was: gay.

Well, at least he got better, voted in the right way, and has now decided to come out of the closet – something that is likely to happen today.

The alpha and the omega

This may surprise you, but I’ve already selected next week’s four-part BBC drama The Nativity on my DVR. I watched that Passion thing, too, the other year – the one with Joseph Mawle as JC.

I like dramas. Whether they’re based on facts or myths or entirely made up from scratch, it doesn’t matter. The Passion – JC’s personal omega, if you like – was not challenging and, like the curate’s egg, good in places. Mawle was good.

I suspect The Nativity – his alpha – won’t challenge me, either, although it is written by Tony Jordan of Ashes to Ashes and Hustle fame. So good form.

But will it be mawkish and Christmas-card-ish, or will there be something new brought to it? Who knows? Suck it and see.

I suspect I’ll end up preferring this video below, which is amusing. Not sure whether it’s sincere or a piss-take, but it’s a hoot, and tells the story of the supposed Nativity in emails, social networking and other forms of online communication – including trying to book tickets to Bethlehem.

Enjoy.

Poor Christians! Always getting it in the neck – or not!

Christians and Christmas, as we know, are under attack. The forces of political correctness, evil militant atheists.

Well, one of my favourite comics, Marcus Brigstocke, has been having a go at those who think Christians are being badly done to. Have a look at the video below.

Author of Springer has become a creationist!

Stewart Lee has converted to creationism. I kid you not. This creator of Jerry Springer: The Opera, this stand-up comedian and writer who had ridiculed religion for as long as I’ve been aware of him, believes in God. And he’s praising “militant atheist” Richard Dawkins for it (oh, the quote marks there are not quoting Lee, but the usual suspects for whom anyone who questions religionists’ claims or demands facts is a militant, rabid atheist, out to get them).

Anyway, take a look at this very short video below. It will explain all!

PTT welcomes royal seal of approval for atheists

The British gay humanist charity, the Pink Triangle Trust (PTT), this blog’s parent organisation, has warmly welcomed the Queen’s recognition that people of no faith can lead moral lives and make an equally important contribution to society.

A PTT press release says:

Addressing the Church of England General Synod, the Queen told members that believers and atheists were equally able to contribute to the prosperity and wellbeing of the country.

The Queen, who is supreme governor of the Church of England, said: “In our more diverse and secular society, the place of religion has come to be a matter of lively discussion. It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue and that the wellbeing and prosperity of the nation depend on the contribution of individuals and groups of all faiths and none.”

The PTT secretary George Broadhead commented: “This is a remarkable and very welcome recognition. Coming as it does from the Head of State, it is also extremely important. For far too long religionists, even relatively moderate ones, have tried to claim that only they can lead moral lives and that religious faith of some sort is vital to society’s wellbeing.

“The Queen’s words knock this on the head and should be a lesson to all those who denigrate unbelievers and – in the case of Islamists – threaten them with hellfire and death.

“We hope that the Queen’s words will be noted by those political parties who grant religionists completely unfair privileges, as well as the media which is often grossly prejudiced in their favour.”

Griffith Vaughan Williams, 1940–2010

Griffith Vaughan Williams,
who has died aged 70

We're sad to announce that one of the gay movement’s greatest friends, Griffith Vaughan Williams, has died. He was 70. Williams was lately secretary of the Campaign for Homosexual Equality, one of Britain’s oldest gay campaigning organisations, and he was one of its longest-standing supporters.

Let’s let CHE itself have the first word. In a statement today, it says:

It’s with great sadness that we have to announce the death of Griffith Vaughan Williams, Secretary of CHE. He was 70 years old. Our condolences to his partner, Paul.

Griff was born on the 9th of November 1940 in Bangor, North Wales, and was educated at a local grammar school and then at a college of journalism in Cardiff. He worked for a number of magazines and provincial newspapers around the country, and later in the press office at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, which he left about 20 years ago to become a freelance journalist. After retirement he threw himself into many voluntary causes, serving on committees, attending conferences, and forever asking questions at company meetings.

Griff had been a gay activist since about 1964, and was a leading member of CHE from its very earliest days. In recent years, despite ill-health, he had continued to be the driving force behind many of CHE’s activities. He will be very much missed. His final act as Secretary was to sign the contract commissioning a new book about the history of CHE, a history which he had very much helped to make.

We hope to compile a fitting obituary for Griff, and we would very much welcome any memories and thoughts about him. The CHE reunion at Friends House on the 27th of this month will include a tribute to Griff.

Fellow blogger George Broadhead, secretary of the Pink Triangle Trust, said today of Griff: “He was best know in CHE’s heyday as its conference organiser and was mainly responsible for keeping it going when it declined some years ago.

“I had been friendly with Griff since I joined CHE in the 1960s and, with my partner Roy, set up one of its local groups – Chilterns CHE – in 1970. I’ve been in touch with him many times since then, notably concerned the cooperation of CHE and the Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association in running the winter fairs at Conway Hall in the 1980s and their joint sponsorship of Winter Pride at County Hall and ULU later in that decade. This is described by Griff in detail in the book Out of the Shadows, which will be promoted at the CHE Reunion on 27 November.”

On a personal note, I’d known Griff on and off since 1978 when he did a recce in Coventry, where I lived at the time, in preparation for holding the CHE conference at the De Vere Hotel there. His beard was sort of brownish then.

I worked for a while on the CHE exec with Griff in the late seventies, and met up with him at various functions. Lately, it’s been only voice contact, because I’ve had some input into the CHE annual report and its review of the year.

With telephone contact, you could put the phone at one end of the room and listen from the other side, I remember, so clear (not to say loud) was his delivery. He was also annoyingly (though I say that with affection) averse to modern communications, never, as far as I know, embracing the Internet and email; and getting copy from him for any work I did on the CHE reports necessitated his having to pass it on to someone with a computer, who could then type it up and send it on via email. I think he relied on his trusty fax machine for several years, that being as technological as he got (unless he changed in the past year and I didn’t know).

When someone has been ill, it should come as little surprise that they might die, but it still has the power to shock. As soon as I saw the subject line of an email from George Broadhead this morning – just “Griff Vaughan Williams” – I guessed. When someone has died, that’s all you usually see at the top of an email that brings the sad news. If an email has just a person’s name in that line, I fear the worst.

GVW was indefatigable in his efforts for the gay cause, and was, of course, involved with CHE for decades. He put in hard work and sustained commitment to the cause of gay rights for many years. I’m sure there will be tributes aplenty over the next few days, because there can’t be many in the gay community more worthy of such praise.

Griff was a hard worker, a good organiser, a committed campaigner. He’ll be sorely missed.

Make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise*

Some seem to be saying it’s a good thing that the supermarket giant Tesco, destroyer of many a good high street, has taken over a disused church building in Bournemouth in the South of England.

I’m not so sure.

Oh, yes, it’s good to see religion’s hold on us diminishing to the extent that buildings are falling into disuse. It’s good to see buildings put to a purpose other than propagandising on behalf of superstition.

However, if the religionists concerned – in this case it’s a former Methodist church – want to meet in a building to do their thing, I see no problem, other than that, by dint of being a religion, it gets special tax advantages paid for by you and me. If it weren’t for that, I’d say good luck to them. Just don’t try to impose your beliefs on me and others and on our schools, and don’t try to gain unfair advantage. Just enjoy your religion.

My main concern, though, is that it’s just another milestone on the road to total Tescopoly. Sometimes, yes, a Tesco store is the only place you can get this or that, although one can’t help but wonder whether, if it weren’t for the existence of an edge-of-town one-stop supermarket with handy free car parking, more shops would exist in the high street of said town to provide the this and that you can now get only at Tesco.

So – short of having it as something more useful such as a farmers’ market, selling local produce and helping the local economy – maybe the building would be better being used as a church after all (with all the above caveats, of course).

Having a bunch of people singing and doing their mumbo-jumbo is probably far less harmful to the fabric of our traditional shopping areas, which just cannot compete with Tesco on the fringe, sucking the lifeblood from them, as has happened in towns near where I live.

Now Tesco – in the guise, in this case, of its Tesco Express stores – is moving into hitherto untried territory in the form of churches, it’s just strengthening its hold.
__________
* John 2: 16: “And [he] said unto them that sold doves [in the temple], Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise.”

Want to save money? Stop paying for kids to attend “faith” schools

Just the way to save money in these straitened times: stop paying for the Deluded Herd to send their kids to school.

It’s happened in Lancashire in England (and a few more places in the UK, too), and the county council there could save a couple of million quid by not paying for transport for kids to go to “faith” schools.

Quite right. If parents want to send their kids to “faith” schools, let them pay. It’ll cost them £2 per day per child. One “faith” school, St Christopher’s in Accrington, pulls pupils in from far afield.

Some bloke there says the move will hit parents with more than one child at a religious school. Then let them send the child to a school nearer home.

As more councils knock this silly nonsense on the head, it may just start a change in parents’ priorities, and “faith” schools may have to become like ordinary state schools, taking kids from their natural catchment areas, whatever their “faith”, or whether they have a belief system or not.