Nifty nuptials

If you really feel you must mark the wedding of two people you don’t know, who are tying their knot later this month in London, where traffic will no doubt be held up for the duration and taxpayer money will be spent on the lavishness of it all, then watch this video instead. OK, it’s an ad for T-Mobile, but you don’t have to rush out and buy one. Just enjoy.

I suspect most will have seen it, anyway, because it’s just about gone viral. However, I’m impressed by the lookalikes they’ve found. Often, not even comedy programmes on the telly get things as close as some of those dancing down the isle of Westminster Cathedral, er, Abbey, er Parish Church, whatever.

Meanwhile, it seems Britons are more sensible than many give them credit for, if this report is anything to go by. There won't be many of us celebrating, it seems.

Why gay kids commit suicide

Suicide attempts by gay teens – and even straight kids – are more common in politically conservative areas where schools don’t have programs supporting gay rights, a study involving nearly 32,000 high school students found.

So says an Associated Press report on 365 Gay.

Hardly surprising, really, is it?

The study focused on the state of Oregon, and “found a higher rate of suicide attempts even among kids who weren’t bullied or depressed when they lived in counties less supportive of gays and with relatively few Democrats. A high proportion of Democrats was a measure used as a proxy for a more liberal environment.”

Wise counsel?

Giving Catholics a contract for sensitive counselling of possibly vulnerable people is like putting a lunatic in charge of the asylum, a paedo in charge of the nursery, a klepto in charge of the shop.

But Richmond Council in England has done just that, and the gay humanist charity the Pink Triangle Trust is not a little dischuffed about it.

The silly councillors think the Catholic Children’s Society will handle it better than a secular organisation, Off the Record, which has been providing the service for the past two decades.*

Let’s just clear one thing up: secular doesn’t mean atheist, and a secular organisation will very likely contain religious people as well as atheists and agnostics. But a religious organisation is going to peddle a position, and would you want a gay kid, say, being advised by an active Catholic?

Oh, it’ll be all right, son, you’ll grow out of it; Jesus will help; pray to God; it’s a phase; God meant you to love a woman (et cetera, et cetera, reversing the genders as necessary).

George Broadhead, secretary of the PTT – which is this blog’s parent body – said, “The issues on which counselling service will be provided to teenagers include contraception, unwanted pregnancy and homophobic bullying.

“Given the dogmatic and reactionary stance taken by the Catholic Church on abortion, contraception and homosexuality, which will clearly be strictly adhered to by the CCS, the decision of the Council is outrageous and beggars belief. I hope that young people will be well enough informed about the Church’s stance to give the CCS a very wide berth indeed.”

We have to entertain the possibility that there were other reasons why Off the Record was not chosen this time. That’s something between OTR and the council. But choosing an organisation whose ethos is so anti-gay, anti-abortion and anti-contraception to counsel vulnerable people whose problems may well concern these things seems unwise in the extreme.
__________
* Corrected from my original “two years”. Mea culpa. Thanks, George (see comments).

Burning issue

Well, things have reached a pretty pass when you can’t burn a bit of rubbish in your back garden for fear that a left-leaning Sunday newspaper will grass on you in its zeal for political correctness.

It happened to British National Party candidate Sion Owens – who is standing in the Welsh Assembly elections next month – when the Observer shopped him, apparently, after receiving a leaked video of him burning a copy of the Koran.

Not many people – this blogger included – have much positive to say about the BNP, but it comes down to freedom of expression.

And, yes, no one can forget what happened in Afghanistan after Pastor Terry Jones of Florida presided over the burning of a copy of the Koran last month. However, the killings were not Jones’s fault, any more than similar atrocities – if they happen – will be the fault of this BNP thug.

Owens had the case against him dropped. The BNP says on its website that the police have realised that you can’t make a racial-hatred case – as it says they were doing to do – if Islam isn’t a race. True.

And what Owens did was provocative, and no doubt he’s chuffed to bits that his party is getting publicity out of his act. He’s probably chuffed to bits, too, that he’ll have achieved his fifteen minutes of notoriety.

And, no, I will not say he shouldn’t have done it, any more than I’d say Pastor Terry Jones shouldn’t have presided over a Koran-burning incident in March. All I’d say is: is there a real need to?

If you didn’t feel the need to do it in the first place, you couldn’t be accused of self-censorship by then not doing it, any more than I am guilty of self-censorship by not burning a copy of the Koran or a bible.

I just don’t see the need, think it would be futile and can’t be arsed to do it.

Is barmy pastor to blame for barmy Islamists’ murders?

Pastor Terry Jones is that chap who threatened to burn a copy of the Koran last year, decided against it (after some pressure, it has to be said) and then, last month, presided over a burning of it, anyway.

But should he be condemned for the violence that resulted on 1 April in Afghanistan, caused by people who don’t like his sentiments or that he presided over the burning of some sheets of paper – as if they were the only sheets left containing historic scripture?

Nope.

Digital Journal has a longish think piece on it, discussing the New York Post’s barmy idea that Jones has blood on his hands and a Telegraph piece by Brendan O’Neill (editor of Spiked), which says he doesn’t.

Homophobe couple still want to adopt kids

Eunice and Owen Johns

A Christian couple from Derby, England, who were at the centre of a row over fostering are reapplying to be able to foster kids, even though their religious principles tell them they can’t talk positively to their charges about being gay.

“Owen and Eunice Johns, together with Derby City Council, had previously made a joint application to the High Court, asking the Court to make a declaration on how the Council should treat an application from potential foster carers who were unwilling to promote the practice of homosexuality to a small child,” says Christian Concern.

Their report continues:

As was widely reported at the time, although the particular Judicial declaration on the balancing of rights that the parties sought was not given, the Judges used the opportunity provided to make a forceful case against the right to manifest Christian beliefs in the face of equalities legislation, stating that homosexual rights trumped freedom of religion in the context of fostering, that Councils can require the promotion of homosexuality and that it would be legal for Councils to reject foster applications from Christians on the basis that they would not promote homosexuality.

The Johnses say in a letter to the council:

You know that we would love and care for any child in our care and you are aware of our views on sexual ethics. However, the National Minimum Standards (NMS) on fostering, the Statutory Guidance, the Public Sector Equality Duty under the Equality Act 2010 and the Council’s own Equality and Diversity Policy do not require that “positive attitudes be demonstrated towards homosexuality” (paragraph 101 of the High Court judgment). Such a requirement is not mandatory.

We believe that there is still space in the law for Christians to be accommodated in the fostering process and that the Council can make a “permissible accommodation” which would conform with NMS 7.2 and the Council’s Equality and Diversity Policy and that it can interpret the relevant policies in a manner that balances the rights of the homosexual community and the rights of those who subscribe to biblical views on sexual ethics. The Council can still comply with their duties under the Children’s Act 1989.”

As far as we can see, Christians are not being discriminated against, as these homophobes seem to think. Only homophobes are being discriminated against, because homophobes want to discriminate against gay kids.

It’s a no-brainer, really. They shouldn’t foster unless they could show that they’ll change their ways.

They may well be very loving in all other respects, but, if a kid is showing signs of being gay, it’s up to loving parents to give support, because to refuse to do so could mess up the kid’s mind. And that is not loving.

Let them not eat cake!

A wedding cake

Christians are up in arms over an abandoned scheme to hand out pieces of a huge wedding cake – baked to commemorate the forthcoming royal wedding – to UK citizens.

The massive confection has been baked at a secret location in Scotland, and the intention was to mail out a minute portion of it to every citizen in the UK.

Now it’s emerged that, as part of its comprehensive spending review, the government has scrapped plans to distribute the cake, which would have cost an estimated £40 million.

This isn’t the first time the government has scrapped something that’s already been produced. Earlier this year it emerged that four brand-new Nimrod spy planes were to be dismantled as part of the cuts programme, despite the fact that they’d never been used.

Apparently, the cake – so big that it had to be baked over two weeks in several production runs – will now go into landfill. And this is what’s upsetting Christians. But more on that in a moment.

Anti-cuts protestors are not pleased with the decision even to make the cake in first place, but are even more upset by the decision to throw it into landfill.

“It’s an outrage,” said Jonathan Couper, spokesman for Britain’s newest anti-cuts protest group, NoMoreCutsUK.

Couper told PT: “While we’re suffering welfare cuts and cuts in the defence of our country, this government can afford to throw millions of pounds at producing something as trivial as a wedding cake, and then scrap the idea. It shouldn’t have been baked in the first place, but at least the government ought to sell it off in some way.”

But why are religionists up in arms? Well, since the coalition government’s decision to scrap the huge mail-out plan, it’s been decided instead that the huge cake will be transported to a landfill site in northern England.

However, the right-wing Christian organisation Traditional Marriage Matters is furious, because it sees the destruction of the cake as sacrilege. Its spokesman, Rev. Jonah Wales, says the wedding cake has huge significance for traditional marriage and to put it into landfill would be tantamount to blasphemy.

“It emerged in Roman times, when the bridegroom broke a loaf of bread over the bride’s head to symbolise his dominance in the marriage. And that is as it should be: traditional marriage deems the man to have dominance over the subservient woman.

“Far from breaking it over a bride’s head, tipping this beautiful object into landfill is a travesty, an insult to traditional marriage and all that it stands for. We will be fighting for the cake to be cut up as planned and sold on eBay, so that people all over the UK – even the world – have a chance to partake in the wedding of the century. A traditional wedding, between a man and a woman, as God intended.

“At least that way the government stands to recoup some of the money it spent on this project.”

And Mary Croquembouche, president of the Celebratory Cake Bakers’ Association, said, “This would have been a boost to our members at a time when many of them are struggling to keep their businesses afloat during these austere times.”

Angela Battenberg, a former UK parliamentary candidate, added to the protest: “We hear all the time the government going on about how we’re ‘all in this together’,” she said, “but the great and the good will be getting cake at the wedding, something the rest of us will be denied.

“Even Marie Antoinette was in favour of the poor eating cake,” she said. “But not this mean-spirited coalition government, it seems.”

By the way, we did check out that claim about breaking a loaf of bread over a bride’s head. Seems it may be true.
__________
Update: I see Digital Journal, no less, has now picked up our story about the royal wedding cake.

It's child abuse! Children AS YOUNG AS 4 to be 'educated' in atheism! What is the world coming to?

Yes, it's a long headline above, and reflects this blogger's pissed-off-ness with the likes of the Daily Hate (sorry, Mail – old habits die hard).

Its headline screams: CHILDREN AS YOUNG AS FOUR TO BE EDUCATED IN ATHEISM.

What is really happening is that humanism will be incorporated into religious education in primary schools in Blackburn with Darwen, Lancashire (in the north of England), to accompany the religions that are there: Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism, Judaism, Buddhism and Islam. So kids will be told that certain religions exist, and this is what they say, and that there are people who don't do religion, and this is what they say.

Simple and, if you're going to teach religion at all, sensible. Religions can then be put into a context: that there are people who have no religion and there are people who have.

But it's not just the Mail's take: it's also lousy journalism. A Mail hack knows he can get away with the utmost shit if it leads to a screaming headline with some sensationalism in it, manufactured though that sensationalism is in this case.

So he gets brownie points.

However, if you read on you realise it's a story that comes down in favour of humanism and the new bit of the curriculum. There's even a priest quoted:

Reverend Kevin Logan, a local journalist, author and religious community leader, said: "It is quite a change but it is completely right to recognise atheism and humanism.

"They are religions like any others. It is just that people worship man instead of a god.

"I am certainly not worried about Christianity. It can stand against any belief and come out in a good light."

And others quoted in the story come out in favour of a more sensible approach, too. So why do the headline (which is down to the subeditor, usually, not the writer) and the intro make out it's a crime against humanity to teach kids as young as four about atheism?

And nowhere, you'll note, does it venture to suggest that it's perhaps more dangerous to teach kids as young as four about religion, rather than leaving that till later in their school lives, when they are better able to offer critical judgement.

For your reading pleasure . . .

A little something for the weekend? I was sent a request to help publicise an article that lists a number of top atheist blogs. They’re all Stateside, it seems, but so many good atheist resources are, and there are some good ones mentioned here, so worth exploring for weekend reading.

I’ve reprinted part of Harriet Gordon’s article below, but it’s linked to above and you can find the links to the various blogs there. As far as I can make out, it’s a commercial website advertising and linking to degree courses in something called human services, for so many of which you didn’t use to need a degree, and human service was something you just did and learned about as a vocation, largely on the job, not as a degree subject, at a price, with no guarantee of a job at the end of it.

But there’s money in providing degrees, and these days you can get a degree in being a lavatory attendant here in the UK – or is that called a public-amenities consultant now? I forget – and I may be exaggerating just a tad. But that’s just the UK. Goodness knows what goes on in the US.

But I digress, as usual (and some of the subjects within the courses I looked at are degree-able). The website itself isn’t atheist. I don’t blame her for asking atheist blogs to carry a piece to draw readers, but at least it’s highly relevant to PT readers, so I don’t mind giving a bit of a free puff. And there’s other interesting stuff on there, too. And you may even want to do a degree in human services. Here’s a large part of the article, but it’s worth reading it in full:

If you don’t believe in God and find yourself in little company when it comes to your family or friends, you can look to the online community of atheists to get a handle on philosophies and thoughts on the lack of a higher being through blogs and messageboards. Even if you do believe in a higher power, you may want to explore these top atheist blogs to get an idea of the thought process behind those who lead a non-secular [I think she means secular] lifestyle.

Top atheist blogs

If you’re looking for some concrete direction that depends on science rather than the supernatural, these are the blogs to explore atheism.

1. Atheists: This atheist blog talks about events going on throughout the U.S. and focuses on government agendas that merge church and state.

2. Friendly Atheist: This blog examines the different media stories where God is blamed or mentioned for actions, good and bad.

3. Atheist Media: At this site you’ll find posts on the role religion has in various parts of the world. It’s an interesting and eye opening look at how different we all are, while essentially wanting the same things from life.

4. Atheist Revolution: This is arguably the best atheist blog out there and regularly analyzes how to protect those who are vocal about their belief system (or lack of).

5. Planet Atheism: This blog focuses on religion in America, showing how beliefs vary from region to region and how religion is playing a role in places it shouldn’t, like the military.

6. 40 Year Old Atheist: This is a great blog for learning more about the atheist movement and the comments section is always alive with freethinkers who have something to say.

7. Adult Onset Atheist: This atheist blogger has some original thoughts on religion and the role it plays in modern American society. Make sure you stop by for the well-crafted rants too.

8. Atheist Experience: This blog takes a look at the religious stories making headlines (primary those focuses on Christianity) and how to make your point of view known without offending those who believe in a higher power.

9. Atheist Blogs: This is like the superstore of atheist blogs. It condenses all of the latest stories and blog posts from around the web into one concise place, so you can pick and choose what you want to read without trolling for hours.

10. An Atheist: For interesting commentary on the history of religion, check out this atheist blog. It makes some great points that those who are questioning their faith may be swayed by.

11. Martin S Pribble: This blog covers atheism and talks about the weight people place in their religions beliefs when it comes to making a decision between right and wrong.

12. About Atheism: The About site for learning about atheism is among their best sites and has plenty of content over why you should take the logical and science-driven approach to life.

13. Common Sense Atheism: This blog goes after Christianity and analyzes statements made in the media by political figures and leaders. It’s a smart blog with in-depth posts, so be sure you check it out when you have time to sit and stay awhile.

14. Unreasonable Faith: Believe it or not, this atheist blog is penned by a former evangelical preacher. This guy knows his stuff when it comes to navigating the Bible, so you know he isn’t making judgement calls based on poor reasoning.

15. Stupid Evil Bastard: This blog isn’t all religion (or anti-religion), but it does touch on interesting subjects regarding religion’s place in the government and our public school system.

There’s more in the article. Enjoy.
__________
Update See the comment from New Atheist below. Click on his/her link for more useful resources.

Criticising Catholics for hating gays? It's a blow to their human rights, so it is

Bloody Catholic loonies are at it again. They're complaining that being criticised for hating gays is somehow against their human rights. They feel they have a human right – a human right – to vilify gays and declare all same-sex relationships disordered, no matter what harm it does by the toxic message it sends.

A Reuters report tells us:

People who criticise gay sexual relations for religious or moral reasons are increasingly being attacked and vilified for their views, a Vatican diplomat told the United Nations Human Rights Council on Tuesday.

Archbishop Silvano Tomasi said the Roman Catholic Church deeply believed that human sexuality was a gift reserved for married heterosexual couples. But those who express these views are faced with "a disturbing trend," he said.

If it weren't so sad you'd laugh.

See the story here.

Home Sec hints that legal marriage for UK gays is on the way

Home Secretary Theresa May has told a Stonewall gathering that the coalition government will move on legalising marriage for gay people.

I tend not to trust people who change overnight (and May has form on voting against pro-gay legislation), but, for those who really go in for that kind of thing (marriage, I mean), it's a move in the right direction.

Her speech also reiterated government desire to allow religious premises to be used for gay ceremonies, but the story linked to above also quotes a senior Roman Catholic loony who reckons it's a threat to marriage as he sees it. But, then, he would, wouldn't he?

Civil partnerships on the Isle of Man welcomed

The gay Humanist charity the Pink Triangle Trust (PTT) has warmly welcomed the news that the Isle of Man is to introduce a law granting gay couples the right to a civil partnership.

Gay couples on the island will get the right to a civil partnership after a new law was signed in Tynwald, the Manx parliament. As in the rest of the UK, it gives them the same rights as married couples regarding inheritance, pensions and tax allowances. The law comes into effect on 6 April 2011.

The island has its own parliament and own laws, some of which are very different from those in the UK. Abortion laws are still much stricter, the birch used to be commonly used as a punishment, the death penalty was not abolished till 1993, and homosexuality was illegal until 1992. As a result, the island was subject to a boycott by UK trade unions, which had held a lot of conferences there.

Seventy-seven-year-old gay activist George Broadhead, who is the PTT’s secretary, said: “This is great news. As a Manxman myself who was born on the IOM in 1933 and realised I was gay at school in the 1940s, I know only too well what a frightful homophobic place it was – much of it stemming, as elsewhere, from religious bigotry.

“Activists on the island itself and the rest of the UK launched a campaign to get the law changed and I am proud to have played a part in this. I entered into a civil partnership in the UK in 2006 and I am delighted that my fellow Manx gays are now able to do the same.”

Well, it's a start . . .

A retired bishop in homophobic Uganda has said his fellow Anglicans should get their fingers out and start protesting about attacks on gay people.

Well, he said they shouldn't keep silent, which amounts to the same thing.

His remarks follow the bludgeoning to death of the Christian gay activist David Kato.

Perhaps this guy will be the next, although we sincerely hope not.

Nordic Rainbow Humanist Award goes to Malawi

The 2010 Nordic Rainbow Humanist award has gone to secretary general George Thindwa and his colleagues of the Association for Secular Humanism of Malawi for their "courageous public stand for LGBT identity and rights in this African nation, taking great risks of retaliation from homophobic politicians, religious leaders, and a hostile mass media", said Nordic Rainbow Humanists' international secretary Bill Schiller in Stockholm.

"This is the second time our annual award has gone to Africa and we were very pleased to have this recommendation from an earlier winner and staunch supporter of LGBT rights Leo Igwe of the Nigerian Humanist Movement.

"The Malawi Humanists are being honoured for defending LGBT rights in a continent where tolerance towards the LGBT communities is a rare exception and where even former African freedom fighters and anti-colonialist leaders, now in power, openly call for the imprisonment and punishment of LGBT people," said Schiller.

Earlier winners of the Nordic Rainbow Humanist award include George Broadhead (co-founder and long-serving secretary of the UK Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association, who is also secretary of this blog's parent, the Pink Triangle Trust), veteran Norwegian lesbian activist Kim Friele, Carl-Johan Kleberg (former chairman of the Swedish Humanists), veteran Dutch gay activist Rob Tielman (former president of the International Humanist and Ethical Union), Leo Igwe and colleagues of the Nigerian Humanist Movement, and Remyus Cernea and colleagues of the Romanian Humanist Association.

In a message to George Thindwa, George Broadhead said, "Warm congratulations to Malawian Humanists on winning the 2010 Nordic Rainbow Humanist Award. If the situation for LGBT people is anything like as dire as that in Uganda, you richly deserve this for so courageously taking up the cudgels on their behalf. You also deserve great praise for your staunch opposition to the persecution of people in Malawi accused of witchcraft. As a gay Humanist who won this same award in 2002, I salute you."

UK gay humanists unsurprised at archbishop’s stance on gay ceremonies in church

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has said that he will not countenance Church of England buildings being used to conduct gay civil partnership ceremonies and is not prepared to let the Government tell the Church how to behave.

Commenting on this on behalf of the gay Humanist charity the Pink Triangle Trust, owner of this blog, its secretary George Broadhead said, “This is not at all surprising. When Williams was first appointed in 2003, he was warmly welcomed by gay Christians as a liberal, but it has become obvious in recent years that he has thrown in his lot with the Church’s evangelicals who take a hard line on gay sexual relationships and gay rights. He has been unwilling to distance himself, let alone condemn, the worst of these like the Anglicans in Uganda. Although he publicly condemned the murder of the Ugandan gay activist David Kato, he declined to recognise the part played in stoking up anti-gay hatred by the Anglican Church in that country.

“Humanists campaign for a society in which everyone is free to practise their faith, change it, or not have one at all, but many wonder why any self-respecting gay person would want a ceremony in a building which belongs to an institution which oppresses them. After all there are now plenty of plush alternatives to the often gloomy registry offices.”

Gay is a choice, says jackass Justin

Teen heartthrob Justin Bieber . . .

Oh, such journalese!

Anyway, teen heartthrob Justin Bieber has shown that he's as naïve as he is cute by saying that being gay is a matter of choice – a decision.

Just to show what a silly little boy he is, he has added that abortion is wrong, even if the mother-to-be has been raped.

Oh, Justin, you've got a bit of growing up to do. Sorry if that sounds patronising, coming from an old git, but, Jesus, there are times when you just gotta tell a kid he's a dumbass motherfucker.

Pink News says: "When asked [by Rolling Stone mag] what his views on homosexuality are, Bieber responded: 'It’s everyone’s own decision to do that. It doesn’t affect me and shouldn’t affect anyone else.'

"It is not clear whether he intended to label homosexuality as a lifestyle choice."

Sounds like it to this humble blogger. Either his views will mature and he'll regret his childish outburst, or he'll reach adulthood thinking like this – and then sensible people can really have a go at him.

Mind you, this is the young man who told the Guardian in November last year: "I pray all the time. I pray two to three times a day. When I wake up I thank him for my blessings. I thank him for putting me in this position. And at the end of the day I get out my Bible. At home-school my tutor is Christian, so we go over Bible verses. It's something that keeps me grounded."

Pass the sick bucket, somebody.

Muslims' hate posters in London's East End

Kids going to school in London's East End are being treated to hate posters near their school, declaring "Gay Free zone". Charming!

We assume it's the work of Islamic extremists, because the posters add, "Allah is severe in punishment".

"They appeared across Whitechapel and Spitalfields at the weekend—some even believed to be targeted at school children," says the East London Advertiser, linked to above.

"Most have now been have torn down by a community writer and activist who has had to keep his identity secret because of previous death threats."

Main churches – and of course Norman bloody Tebbit – against civil partnerships in religious premises (no surprise there, then)

I've just realised I've told the entire story in the headline. Never mind. Here's a link to a story on Digital Journal about it, with further links there.

It should come as no surprise to us, of course, that right-wing Tories – the ones who make the Nasty Party look positively benign – would oppose the idea. The Church of England does, although the Archbishop of York is guarded.

And as for Pope sodding Ratzinger . . . well, it goes without saying.

Uganda: it's worse than we thought

Things seem to be worse in Uganda than most people thought, according to BBC Radio 1 presenter Scott Mills.

Mills has been speaking to PinkNews.co.uk about an upcoming documentary. The gay presenter told how he feared for his own safety in the country.

"Mills met anti-gay MP David Bahati as part of filming for The World’s Worst Place to be Gay?," says the outlet.

Bahati is the homophobic – nay, evil – twat who would be happy to see gays executed.

"When the presenter said he was gay, Bahati became enraged and the film crew fled," says PinkNews.co.uk. "Later, they heard that Bahati had sent armed police to a hotel he thought they were staying at."

He's quoted as saying, "I was really frightened. It’s just something that you wouldn’t think would happen. It was a real shock to the system and we were told to lie low."

The World’s Worst Place to be Gay? will be shown on BBC3 at 9 p.m. on Monday, 14 February.

Mr Green respondeth

The real Stephen Green, as we called him in a previous post when his ex-wife accused him of beating her up, has responded.

She, as you'll see from the above link, made allegations in the Daily Mail about this nutcase who seems to spend most of his energy ranting about gays. He had beaten her and the kids, she said, and had been a thoroughly bad lot.

In the interests of balance, here is a link to his response, which appears on his blog.

He says, among other things: "The article was a catalogue of smears and distortions stitched together by a tabloid journalist [Frances Hardy] who specialises in TV, celebrities, women’s features and gossip. She also has an anti-Christian agenda. Just over a year ago, she wrote a sycophantic piece exalting the pro-paedophilia campaigner Peter Tatchell. In April this year, she gushed over the first two lesbians who have jointly put their names on the birth certificate of the baby born to one of them."

As for an allegation that was tantamount to one of marital rape, Green says, "I never once had sexual relations with my former wife against her clearly expressed wish."

He goes on, "Secondly, in connection with the published allegations that I assaulted her, the truth, sadly, is the complete opposite. I had to obtain a harassment order against her to stop a campaign of intimidation and on one of the occasions when she assaulted me, I reported the matter to the police and she received a police caution."

There's more.
__________
Update: I left a comment on Stephen Green's blog. I did wonder whether he'd use it, and he did. I mentioned the famous "Dr Laura" letter, which takes the piss out of Leviticus. He pointed me to a post of his own that tries to refute the letter, but fails. For one who you would think would call the Bible inerrant, he seems happy to say that this or that law has now been done away with because of Paul's vision or Peter's vision in the New Testament. You be the judge. You might like to argue the point with Mr Green. However, I think you would be wasting your time.