British toleration guaranteed Benedict a good show

As the wall to wall coverage subsides, I’d guess that not much will change as a result of the Pope’s visit. The secular and religious events were just about pitch perfect if like me, you enjoy that sort of thing. The faithful seemed to turn out in greater numbers to proclaim that Catholicism had not collapsed on account of the abuse scandals, which in any case affected Britain less severely than many other countries.  The kids cheered and whooped just as their parents did after waiting for hours for JP2. These days, it would be different in Ireland.

Protestants – or Anglicans anyway – watching the Masses can again observe the close similarities between the liturgies. Just when you’re asking yourself what’s the difference, along come the little rituals over which hundreds burned and died , the Real Presence, the intercession of Mary and a long list of saints, the ” miracles” wrought by Newman and the supposed relics of his hair and blood. Strange if you will, but worth fighting over or even refusing to shake hands?

Basic courtesy meant Dawkins and Co never stood a chance. Once again, the media pack got it wrong. The love of Jesus not creationism was  the Pope’s ” heart to heart.”message and that is an impossible target to hit. And while the contraceptive ban can be deplored as an opener to Aids, it has to be remembered that most Catholics now live in the same Third World.

Secular morality may be less of a piece, but it still seems more understanding of human nature than the Vatican’s. The gulf over sexuality male and female seems unbridgeable and lies at the heart of the evasion over the abuse cover-up. To blame  secular influences for society’s ills ( including presumably clerical abuse)  is no less defamatory now than it was before the Pope repeated it several times during his visit.

The Church of England and the British state quietly understand this.  Harmony between the churches is not the same as unison and over social issues on the ground – care for the elderly for example is still attainable. But Catholic expansionism  still lives. What other message can be taken from the emphasis given to the  beatification of Newman the former Anglican?

The locals got off lightly. Nobody noticed. Even Paisley enjoyed only a 20 second cutaway singing a quite pleasant chorus. For all that this was billed as a state visit to the UK , it really applied to Great Britain apart from the handshakes minus the Moderator in Westminster Abbey.

The Pope’s visit it showed a people at ease with religion and not greatly challenged by it.

If Benedict ever follows in the footsteps of Patrick, everyone involved will face a far sterner test.

, , ,

  • CW

    Spotted this flag belonging to a pilgrim on the London tube returning from the papal vigil in Hyde Park:

    Just think of all the confusion it would cause in Northern Ireland if someone was seen waving it…

  • I’m considering the differences between “toleration”. “tolerance” ansd sheer couldn’t-care-less.

  • Alan Maskey

    British toleration guaranteed nothing. What supremacist waffle.

    1. Chris Patten played a pivotal role. So too probably did the Tory government and the Islamic and atheist extemists in the Foreign Office were most likely put in their place, thoug, sadly not sacked and sued.
    2. Catholic parishes and networks organised the crowds. You should have noticed the number of blacks, who were very prominent. One black Brit soldier carrying his toddler got Communion in the Abbey from Il Papa.
    3. The Pope used many of Newman’s Anglican (not RC) hymns. The attempts to bring the Anglican dissidents back to the Truth is obviously what turns the Pope on.
    4. Newman is the first Catholic this Pope has beatified. Lessons aplenty there.
    5. The abuse scandals did not affect most Catholics anywhere. The big number of school kids attending is a testament to the vibrancy of RC schools, which, by and large, outperform the (paid for by the RC tax payers) schools the riff raff send their kids to.
    6. Secular morality is an oxymoron. Is there a canon you can point to besides the rantings of Singer and his sorry ilk?
    7. The Catholics martyred in England and Wales were martyred for adhering to the Truth. They were not martyred for the reasons you cite. Literacy rates were less than 5% at the time of the Reformation; votive and candle taxes were more important, as was land grabbing and the urge to “do as thou wilt”.
    8. Catholic expansionism: Any Church wanting numbers goes to Africa, not England. The core of Anglicanism: The Monarch, the British Armed Forces, the Monday Club will hold, come hell or high water. Most Anglicans live outside England.
    9. The Pope is right to attack relativism.
    10. One notes, you link Anglicanism and the British state, as one should.
    11.The British people are mostly challenged by Big Brother, Cironation Street and the off field (only) antics of Wayne Rooney. David Cameron has admitted this.
    12. Ireland, for the RC Church, is a backwater. Britain has more Catholics and more important Catholics too such as Bliar and Patten and one of the self styled Royal Family. Keeping sweet with the Brits is also important and bagging the Anglicans a biggie. I see, incidentally, the Pope said Don Scotus was a Brit.
    12a. If the Pope visits Ireland and I cannot understand why he should, he will get a huge welcome. Martin McGuinness said he would be honoured to meet him (I was in prison etc). Rent a crowd would get going but would stand a good chance of getting their heads kicked in. The backwater is a long way down the Pope’s to do list. As it should be. This successful state visit puts it a little further back.

    CW: Good link. I saved it.

  • British tolerance ensured a good visit or British indifference? I think indifference played a large part. The trip went well. A smiling and kindly old man was welcomed by and played to the crowds, and there were crowds. The faithful filled the parks and lined the streets. I hope they enjoyed the time and thought it was worth it.

    There were more protesters than I expected but they were well behaved, almost respectful. How very British!

    Britain has probably always had more catholics than Ireland, there is nothing new in that. The next big deal will be 2012. Who knows the Pope may turn up here, if his health and the MSM are on his side.

    I thought the Scots deserved particular praise, next to the north Scotland is the home of sectarianism, and there was not a sign of it.

    Congratulations all round would seem to be in order.

  • fitzjameshorse1745

    I dont actually think that the British have more toleration than anyone else. Or less. Ive never much cared for Racism.

    What triumphed was human decency. The Pope for all his many faults as listed by Polly Toynbee and “Dr” Ian Paisley actually came accross quite well…although you couldnt hear him behind a bus ticket.

    A wee bit unwordly and prissy looking……a teutonic Cardinal Cathal Daly.
    There might be a little reaction to the Mock the Week type nastiness.
    As Hugh Dennis said ….he might have been “here” during the War.
    As Ed Byrne said if they are so obsessed with public safety why are they inviting Catholic priests.

    Maybe ..just maybe… Catholicisms critics overplayed their hand. But redefining it as a victory for “British toleration” is certainly a case of anti Catholics trying to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.
    Conceivably the “new sectarianism” is not quit as in tune with British public opinion as it thought it was.
    Perhaps people thought that it was a strange kind of intolerance which would single out Catholicism but would not single out Islamism or Judaism (for fear of branded as Islamophobic and anti semite).

    Gin and tonics all round in the BBC bar.

  • Big Maggie


    “A smiling and kindly old man”

    Don’t take this the wrong way, but I suggest that if one of YOUR children or grandchildren had been raped by a Catholic priest, and Mr Ratzinger had refused to take steps to have that priest brought to justice and punished then you might consider him to be less than a kindly old man.

    He has done this and worse. We should not forget it and allow the amoral spin-doctors their day.

  • Big Maggie

    Oh no! I have not taken it the wrong way and nor do I disagree with you. My comment was about his appearance, the, if you like, show biz of it.

    I did not support the protesters because I thought the believers had the right to their faith, not because I support that faith in any way.

    Ratzinger represents the worst of the RCC and I am fully aware of that. I am in favour of making the RCC hand over all its files on child abuse to the appropriate countries and authorities and also in favour of making sure independent people are at the Vatican to ensure that is done. I’m no supporter but I do recognise and have some sympathy with those who believe and have been so badly served by the church they put such faith in.

    A am sorry if I gave any other impression.

  • old school

    “British toleration”?
    Some of the banners at the protest were pretty offensive.
    References to Nazis, blanket generalisations etc.
    Had it been a protest against a Rabbi, I believe the term to describe it would´ve been Anti Semetic.
    Had it been an Irish protest against the Queen, i believe it would be described as “backward looking” and “fanatical”.
    If you don’t agree with the teachings of the Bible, simply ignore it and those who do.
    What right have non Catholics to dictate what Catholics should and should not believe in?
    How arrogant of those protestors?

  • Alan Maskey

    Here are some Catholic phone apps, complements of the Daily Telegraph, Britain’s only paper of repute.

    The Telegraph also had pictures of the riff raff protesters, some dressed as Popes and nuns. The riff raff do have a passion for that, dressing up and insulting nuns in particular.

    If Old School wants to read unbridled racist comments, he should read secular and humanist websites to get their comments on the Irish, famines and let’s do it again by hiding their potatoes.

    Of course, Marx and child exploiter Engels, so beloved by retards, had some truly horrid things to say about the Czechs and others they saw fit for total extermination. So they are folowsing an ignoble tradition.

    Wasn’t Margaret Thatcher great? Meeting the Pope anjd doing the Battle of Britain gig on Sunday? With a little help from her friends.

  • Alan Maskey

    Ive reached the only conclusion possible: you are sick.

  • Alan Maskey

    Sick of morons.
    Marx wrote in 1848 that the “Slavic riffraff…as well as the Czechs, and Croats, are retrograde races whose only function in the world history of the future is to be cannon fodder.” Engels wrote in the same year that, “World war will make whole reactionary peoples disappear from the face of the earth. This, too, is progress. Obviously, this cannot be fulfilled without crushing some delicate national flower.”
    I am sorry if my disagreeing with the extermination of the Czechs and Croats annoys you. But that is your problem. And you should really get help for it.
    I am also sorry if my praising Thatcher of the Queen offends you but, like all decent people, I admire their tenacity to England, Home and Beauty. But that is your problem. And you should really get help for it.
    I am sorry if giving Catholic phone apps upsets you. But that is your problem. And you should really get help for it.

    I am sorry if you agree with the racist humanists who joke about the Irish Famine. But that is your problem. And you should really get help for it.

    I would like to see these sectarian retards you admire mock Muslims the way they mock the faith of our fathers (English hymn btw). But that would be their problem. And they would die for it. And that would shut them up.

  • tacapall

    Spot on old school, what has really changed, we used to think this type of bigotry was confined to this part of Ireland but there you go, thats this part of the worlds version of religious liberty when it comes to Irish people.

  • Alan Maskey

    Whilst not being an admirer of any of the people you mention, I staunchly defend their right to ‘be’.

    The Croats and the Czechs are alive and thriving, they need no help from either of us, likewise Mrs Thatcher and the Queen will continue quite nicely with or without us.

    I have never, and nor would I ever, joke about the last famine in Ireland, nor will I keep quiet while others use it for their own ends.

    I do not and nor have I ever admired any kind of sectarianism, nor do I support any attack on the Muslim faith.

    A well organised protest took place as was their right, they harmed none and hardly took a comma, never mind a headline from the Pope, arguably you have given them more time than any of the MSM have.

  • tacapall

    Who gives a fk about Marx or engels or whoever wrote philosophy donkeys years ago its not relevant in todays world, attitudes and ideals have changed and so has the pilosophy of war, religion and social opinion. Why such organised opposition and protest about a religion or opinion about something that can never be proved, including your own opinion for protesting.

  • tacapall

    Protesting is a time honoured tradition and the protesters had the right and some cause. It was a fair gathering, more than I thought there would be, but they kept it peaceful and fairly subdued, and certainly this Pope had no right to expect more arguably he was lucky to get away with such courtesy.

  • Archie Noble

    “The gulf over sexuality male and female seems unbridgeable and lies at the heart of the evasion over the abuse cover-up.”

    Brian, not at all. Bishops where abuse happened did not deal effectively with the issue. That is a failure of management not a theological problem. There is also a problem in some quarters with a culture of clericalism – the incorrect view that priests are the Church hence the cover ups. B16 is dealing with both issues. There will be blood and bleating.

    On theology he is orthodox so no women priests, no relaxation of celebacy, no Blairite nonsense about moving with the times. Also expect renewed criticism of capitalism and more focus on the needs and dignity of the poor too. That’s the Catholic package but if you don’t like it you don’t have to be a Catholic.

    “Basic courtesy meant Dawkins and Co never stood a chance. Once again, the media pack got it wrong”. Yes I think your right on both counts and its interesting to consider why. Firstly these lads have been kicking the Anglicans around for ever with impunity. Interupt an Easter service yeah why not. They also are in the main moneyed and feted and the darlings of a rather poor pack of British journos. They live in a bubble and really were off their turf in tackling B16 and more importantly his multi cultural mainly working class co religionists. Look at the numbers it tells the story.

    I have sent my proposal to the BBC for a televised cage fight between Frank Skinner ( Supporter of the visit) and Stephen Fry ( Anti visit). It may help to restore balance and will certainly settle the issue of whether QE2 should have invited B16.

  • lamhdearg

    i wonder if the pope had been killed by is islamist would the taigs have taken the pro palistiane flags down?.Up the hezbullah rocket team

  • Big Maggie


    Feed not the trolls.

    And sorry that I misunderstood you! Good to be reminded that your heart’s in right place.

  • Big Maggie

    Thanks. I know I should not feed the trolls but sometimes they can be so annoying! LOL. I will try not to do it again!

  • Trolling 101: How to quote Marx.

    Cut and paste from [e.g.] New World Order: The Ancient Plan of Secret Societies by William T Still (Huntington House Publishers). This is a recommended technique because the awkward bits have been rendered into spine-chilling form, and any heavy irony disguised.

    A really competent troll can then throw in the other bit: that Marx was a closet satanist: see Richard Wurmbrand (Living Sacrifice Book Co.) This notion is, of course, derived from the Marx juvenilia, the gothic drama Oulenem and the poem The Player.

  • Alan Maskey

    ArchieNoble: Good points about No Blair. You are also right about the Anglican Church, which only makes the news if an Anglican says something silly. The Anglican Church is England’s biggest provider of social assistance, being organised in every nook and cranny in England’s fair land.
    Britain’s rampant anti Catholicism has waned a lot in recent years and it is only the Paisleys, the Tatchells and those who live in a bubble who continue to kick against the pricks.

    Marx and others remain relevant because such tainted sources and people are stil used as an almost divine mantra by critics of religion and freedom.
    The self sty;ed gay lobby have done a great job in switching the spotlight blame for Aids from their own massive excesses to missionary priests in Africa. If they are so concerned about tax payers’ money being wasted on parades, they could disrupt the Queen’s jaunts, Battle of Britain commemmorations and cancel their own numerous Gay Parades. Consistency in thought is not one of thestrong points of thse losers.

    You notice btw the Pope referred mostly to Great Britain, not the UK.

  • Brian Walker

    Phew! Nobody can accuse Alan of toleration in his tabulated list of furious points. Some of them simply develop what I said while others don’t. But why so much grump?

    “Toleration” may not be quite right,but indifference doesn’t capture the response to the Pope. Courtesy in the face of disagreement and hope of limited agreement may be a better thought.. To accuse me of “supremacist waffle” may tell us more about Alan than anything else.

    I won’t go into the Reformation and the wars of religion except to say they were obviously about more than social and economic change. Religious persecution cut at least two ways and often more than that.

    The gulf over sexuality lies between most of us and the prevalent Vatican view which blames gay rights and more open sexuality generally for the scandal. To put it kindly, this suggests a lack of understanding of the nature of sexuality and wider human relationships.

  • Big Maggie

    Leaving British toleration in the anteroom for a moment, here’s something else to chew on: Irish toleration.

    The Irish Independent and others carry news of more clerical
    sex abuse:

    “MORE priests face being charged with child abuse following inquiries by a garda team set up after the damning Ryan Report.

    “Up to 20 files are to be sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) by a special squad of detectives investigating fresh complaints of sexual and physical assaults by clerics.”

    “The files are expected to be completed in the coming days and will then be forwarded to the DPP to determine if criminal charges should be brought against any of the suspects.”

    By a startling coincidence this news comes just as Mr Ratzinger has left for home. No further embarrassment for the Befrocked One then.

    The Indo continues:

    “In another development last night, it emerged that senior members of the clergy here could be interviewed by gardai as part of a separate investigation into the Murphy Report on clerical abuse in the Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin.”

    Last night, eh? That’s Sunday night. Impeccable timing: pope out of harm’s way.

    I wonder who chose the moment to make all this public.

  • Alan Maskey

    Brian Walker: Because you make a number of very loosely connected points, they are difficult to critique.
    Supremacist waffle: Britain has a long past to square up to. Richard Dawkins could make a start by repaying the Kenyans for the rape of their land his criminal family committed. Until the crimes of Britain’s criminal imperial past and present which rest so easily on the shoulders of her defenders and apologists are wiped clean, they have no moral right to believe themselves to be tolerant. Self praise is feint praise.

    The wars of the Reformation were mostly land grabs with bucaneering states, mercenary Swedes, illiterate German princes and rogue Protestant nations allied to France raping and pillaging all round them. Fortunately for civilisation, Spain stood in their way. This type of propaganda still gets reflected in the trash papers such as the Guardian, Sun, Times and Star. One of the reasons why the Telegraph is the only British paper worth buying if you have a brain that is not obsessed with boobs.
    Oh yes. The persecution cut two ways. Time for the Black Legend, the anti Spanish propaganda of the Dutch and Brits to be wheeled out again to mitigate the crimes of such English heroes as Oliver Cromwell.

    The Catholic Church understands sexuality and draws a line between that and the sexual licentiousness of the sodomite/gay lobby.

    So what is the end result of the visit? The Pope is probably happy that he got a result as they say in football. The Anglicans also got a result. The protesters were shwon up for the hypocrites that they are.

    Britian is, of course, changing. Catholics increasingly do not have to use the tradesman’s entrance. The Popeheads who matter are much happier having Blair, Patten and a gaggle of coloured immigrants on the team than they are having Adams, McGuinness and other embarrassments.

    The waving of flags, the Union Jack and St George Cross in particular, is also of note. The Pope would have been also happy with that.

  • Archie Noble

    “The gulf over sexuality lies between most of us and the prevalent Vatican view which blames gay rights and more open sexuality generally for the scandal.”

    Brian no matter how much the Church laments our current promiscuity B16 is very clear who is responsible. He thinks the abusing clerics are responsible. Nor has he any patience with the cover up by ineffective Bishops. Adherence to Catholic sexual teaching is too onerous for most of us. no sex before marriage, no sex outside marriage and no sex at all if your Gay. However Catholic teaching on sex with children is equally clear, no, not ever, you will burn if you do it. The latter, burning aside, would be endorsed by most of humanity of all faiths or none. A notable exception being Peter Tatchell who we know thinks ‘not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful.”

    The fall out of the Papal visit will be interesting and will include elements of political engagement on Catholic social teaching on the behalf of the poor, a different direction for English Catholicism and an increase in vocations. If anyone had asked me last year if any of these things were likely I would have said not at all.

    Reading the editorials in todays Guardian and Independent(UK) gives a flavour of what is to come. Moving quickly to distance themselves from the hatefest they created they dimly see a vision of a new and, for them, frightening world view where their opinions and prejudices count for nothing.

  • Big Maggie


    “B16 is very clear who is responsible. He thinks the abusing clerics are responsible. Nor has he any patience with the cover up by ineffective Bishops.”

    So he’s finally going to release those documents kept from Judge Ryan and others? Good news indeed!

    “Moving quickly to distance themselves from the hatefest they created …”

    Have you a link or two? And “hatefest”?

  • Big Maggie

    Just when I was thinking how refreshing it is to see the Irish establishment acting independently of the RCC you go and spoil it! Of course the Pope had to be safely out of the area before any nasty fresh cracks in the institutions foundations were exposed. The worst niggling suspicion is that the Brits were in on it too. Is there anywhere on these islands ready to call a spade a spade and an accomplice to child abuse a pervert?

    Oh dear.

  • Alan Maskey

    Could the South Armagh IRA dod a citizen’s arrest on Tatchell to find out just how many paedophiles he knows?

  • Big Maggie

    Jesus wept, enough is enough. Could someone please point Alan Maskey towards A Tangled Web and tell him he’d feel right at home there?

  • Alan Maskey

    So it is ok for Peter Tatchell to hide paedophiles and you should be allowed pour out ill informed anti Catholicism here? At least you are consistent.

    I glanced through the American ex Catholic girl blog you linked. No information there either. Do you have any credible sources for anything?

    Interesting too that it is ok by their loony tune supporters for Tatchell and the doggers to rape children. But hey, that is tolerant Britain.

  • Nunoftheabove

    This plain homophobia is surely grounds for a red card on its own merits, leaving aside the racism and sectarianism we’ve seen from this revolting poster poseur over the last few days and weeks. Not so much avoiding playing the ball at the expense of the man as attacking the team bus on the way to the stadium.

  • Archie Noble

    Big Maggie yes I think so but the mechanism for release is not B16 its the Bishops and there is a a case by case issue with what the victims want. Its worth saying he is not without opposition in the Church but equally he is Pope and has some serious enforcers. One of B16 first actions was to sort out a notorious abuser who it seems had enjoyed imunity under the previous regime. If he lives long enough the stables will be cleansed. As it happens I think Ireland will be a sort of test case.

    Is it links on the internal Church stuff you wanted or on the British Press? Oh and yes it was a hatefest endless articles of ill informed bile by a variety of bigots and gobdaws. I need to say here I have criticised the Church myself and certainly don’y object to others doing so. What happened though was repugnant and in Tatchell’s case hypocrisy of the highest degree.

  • Prionsa Eoghann

    Did someone say that events had passed in Scotland without sectarianism.

    True apart from the odd petty incident;

    Oh and a noticable increase in the FTP brigade out shouting their obscenities around my way prior to the visit.

    Oh and Alan, Celtic did win but it was hard going so it was best the Pope didnae hang around to watch his eleven.

  • Damian O’Loan

    I don’t know where to start, this is so full of unfounded rubbish, but at least:

    “Secular morality is an oxymoron. Is there a canon you can point to besides the rantings of Singer and his sorry ilk?”

    shows your ignorance. That canon you’ve missed is the canon of Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment philosophy of ethics. Or you could try Aristotle. The reading should answer the rest of your points.

    The Pope may be right to attack relativism, but that doesn’t give him all the answers.

  • Alan Maskey

    Let me see. It is ok to attack Catholics,. Popes, nuns and so on. But to point out that Peter Tatchell is on record as encpouraging paedophilia is naughty. Perverts perversely discuss the acts of paedophile priests but to draw attention to the proclivities of the new protesters is not on. It must really hurt that you threw a anti Papish party and hardly anyone came.
    Anbd you name is offensive. Are youy one of these men who dress up as nuns? Brave man taking on nuns.

  • Alan Maskey

    I never even knew there was such a thing as dogging until a female friend told me this is what the liberals/oppresed hompos get up to in a nearby cemetery. I don’t know if you are a dogger or if you go to the gang bang saunas but they are not the actions of people who deserve any respect, especially when they jam up the traffic to protest agains tax payers having to pay for protests such as their own.

  • Alan Maskey

    PE: Th Pope visited Edinburgh, James Connolly’s old stomping ground and the setting for Trainspotting, a great book which I am sure the Holy Father has read.
    A puity he couldn’t toddle along to a local derby. Maybe bring the Queen with him. Now that would be good.

  • My non-theistic heaven forfend that I should defend Tatchell! However, let’s have a bit of truth and light in this misbegotten exchange.

    Despite what Maskey may have read in The Sun and the Daily Mail, or borrowed at second-hand from the very-selective quotations of Bishop Tartaglia, Tatchell is firmly on record:

    The idea that I advocate paedophilia is laughable, sick, untrue and defamatory.

    Unlike many Catholic clergy, I have never abused anyone. Unlike the Pope, I have never failed to report abusers or covered up their crimes. I do not support sex with children. Full stop.

    His view may be more complex and nuanced than Maskey can appreciate:

    Whether we like it or not, under-age young people are having sex with each other. More than half of all teenagers have their first sexual experience by the age of 14, according to the National Survery of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles. All these sexually active young teens are branded by the law as criminals and sex offenders, lumped together with paedophiles. How can this be right?

    An age of consent of 14 might be more realistic and reasonable than 16. If sex at 14 is consensual, and no one is hurt or complains, is criminalisation in the public interest? Is it in the 14-year-old’s interest? It is fair?

    Having a single, inflexible age of consent is prolematic, since different young people mature at different ages. One alternative option might be to introduce a tiered age of consent, where sex involving under-16s would cease to be prosecuted, providing both partners consent and there is no more than two or three years difference in their ages.

    I suspect that many parents will oppose any change. They do not want their children to have sex at an early age. I sympathise with their concerns. But if their children do have sex before the age of 16, surely most loving, responsible parents would not want them to be dragged to court, given a criminal conviction and put on the sex offender’s register, alongside child sex abusers. This is what can, and sometimes does, happen under the present law.

    Any review of the consent laws should be premised on five aims. First, ending the criminalisation of consenting relationships. Second, protecting young people against sex abuse. Third, empowering them to make responsible sexual and emotional choices. Fourth, removing the legal obstacles to earlier, more effective sex and relationship education. Fifth, ensuring better contraception and condom provision to prevent unwanted pregnancies and abortions and to cut the spread of sexual infections like HIV.

    The age of consent does not stop young people having sex. It does not stop peer pressure to have sex. It does not stop child sex abuse. It is next to useless. All it does is criminalise tens of thousands of consenting under-age partners. This is not protection; it’s persecution.

    One does not have to agree with Tatchell. In a free and democratic society (i.e. not a theocratic and autocratic one) he has the right to express views which are held quite widely in medical and legal opinion. Mere misrepresentation and abuse do not adequately answer his arguments.

    Now, can we move on?

  • Malcolm Redfellow

    I completely agree!

    “Now can we move on?”

    Oh yes please!!!

  • Big Maggie


    “Is it links on the internal Church stuff you wanted or on the British Press? Oh and yes it was a hatefest endless articles of ill informed bile by a variety of bigots and gobdaws.”

    Yes, that’s what I meant. Could you provide links to them so that some of us here can decide for ourselves if the authors are indeed “bigots and gobdaws”?

  • Alan Maskey

    Another personal atack by Malcolm Rednapp. Tatchell’s own words have been quoted by others on this site. Admittedly, they were uttered when the National Man Boy Love Association was more intimately involved in the homo lobby. There are plenty of homos support the pedos. These include at least one Nobel Prize winner and several “academics”. If you like, I can post links here (though I do know some run from the truth). Then we had the famous scandal of the Aussie Ambassadors in Indonesia and Kampuchea.

    Malcolm Kidnapp’s quotes show Tatchell back peddling – an indication of Ausie tolerance no doubt when the rat is cornered. Plenty of Aussie rats in Bali incidentally.

    Now Malcolm: this might be a bit too nuanced for you but there are gradations everywhere. Many if not most countries have different ages of consent, not only for males and feamles but depending on the age of the participants.

    This (outdated) site gives the different ages.

    Ages of consent are as low as 12 or 13 in some countires. If one of the fisting fraternity tries this on, they stand a chance of a well deserved jail stretch. Often the marriage age is higher.

    As usual, the fisters do not know their facts. As the good book says, their lies betray them.
    And yes I know that more heteros kiddly fiddle than homos but there is a big and nasty streak to the hedonistic homo movement.

    I see from other posts here the crowd of protesters is growing from 1,000 or so to 10,000+ nobodies. Just like the loaves and fishes.

    BBC2 has papal highlights at 7pm. Please note Lord Chris Patten has star billing. How long before he gets a Papal gong, just like John McCormack and Oliver J.
    Any other Micks get these?

  • fitzjameshorse1745

    Well actually quite a few Micks….Count Plunkett…Marquis McSwiney (historically)
    A papal gong is not actually as big as it once was…and can certainly damage careers as much as enhance them.

    There is an Order called the Sovreign Military Order of Malta…quasi feudal and the headship of it is usually given to an aristocrat. The current and last one both being British.
    As the name implies, its members are usually from a military background.
    It is loosely connected to the Order of Malta we have in Ireland, although the quasi feudal nobility thing isnt taken too seriously here.
    And as the name suggests it has strong Middle East connexions. Involved in medical aid..refugee work.
    Now a few years back Patten became involved with Palestinian refugee aid… that strikes me as interesting and if he is to be awarded a papal seal of approval Id think it would come for that kinda thing rather than organising a papal visit.
    Key thing here is that the current and previous two popes have not been crowned. Poland and Germany were both Republics when they were born
    And Benedict s actually the first to drop the “crown” from his coat of arms.
    Id say that signalled at least a slow down in the system of Papal honours.

  • Nunoftheabove

    I think you mean (or at least had in mind) the papal dong, yes ?

  • to add to the list of Irish Papal honours:

    Count John McCormack (1884-1945), whose working-class background was the wool mill of Athlone, and whose (not bad) grave is in Dean’s Grange.

    Then there was “Sir” Oliver J.Flanagan. Did he get the papal knighthood for his perception (There was no sex in Ireland before television!)? Or was it for his ecumenical maiden speech in the Dáil (1943)? If the latter, let’s run it again, shall we? —

    I cannot associate myself with this Bill or with anything relating to the public safety measures introduced by the Cumann na nGaedheal Government or by the present Fianna Fáil Government because I have seen that most of these Emergency Acts were always directed against Republicanism. How is it that we do not see any of these Acts directed against the Jews, who crucified Our Saviour nineteen hundred years ago, and who are crucifying us every day in the week? How is it that we do not see them directed against the Masonic Order? How is it that the I.R.A. is considered an illegal organisation while the Masonic Order is not considered an illegal organisation? You do not hear one word in these Acts against the banks who are robbing the people, right, left and centre….

    I am a Christian, I must obey the teachings of the Church…

    There is one thing that Germany did, and that was to rout the Jews out of their country. Until we rout the Jews out of this country it does not matter a hair’s breadth what orders you make. Where the bees are there is the honey, and where the Jews are there is the money.

  • Alan Maskey

    Very interesting and informative post Fitzg. Your comment about a slowdown in Pala honours is interesting. Did JP2 dish them out like sainthoods? Our beloved Monarch, HRHQE2 hands out quite a lot of gongs, does she not and people lap them up.I suppose Italy is awash with Papal gongs. Has the current Pope continuede the tradition of increasing the number of non Italian cardinals?

    I should have remembered Plunkett but the other guy caught me broadside. What about the men in black around him? Vatican heavies or Brit Special Branch? Interesting protocol there, I should imagine.

    Speaking of good shows, the BBC2 programme was good with the RC Archbishop and Patten being especially polished. Britain is just such a bigger catch than little Ireland.

    The archbishop said the cops put the protesters at 5,000. Dawkins and Robertson were comical: student union types with bus passes.

    Anyway, only one more Pope, the bawld Petrus Romanus to go. And then it ends.

  • Alan Maskey

    You obviously have dongs in mind a little too much. Are you a dogger? Not that it matters to me (as long as you do not spread too many diseases). I would prefer information to puerility so, if you must j–k off, use a towel and cream and do it in private. Or with the doggers if you prefer.

  • Greenflag

    ‘ Fortunately for civilisation, Spain stood in their way. ‘

    So not the Portuguese then who are after all Britain’s oldest ally in Europe ?

    But you are right the Spanish merely wanted to loot all that South American Gold for themselves alone which is why they ended up not having an industrial revolution and remained an economic and political backwater and a fascist dictatorship until the 1970’s! The extermination of the Incas , Aztecs and hundreds of other Amerindian tribes in Argentina , Chile and Brazil was just of course the Spanish saving ‘civilisation’ 🙁

    The result of the Pope’s visit will be not that much different from the visit of the last Pope to Ireland . It went off well without of course the million strong Phoenix Park style event that took place in Dublin . But anyone attending Church in any of the Dublin suburbs in 1979 and contrasting the attendance then with now would see a huge difference .

    In England and Scotland the Pope was greeted with respect by some , protest by a few but I suspect by quiet indifference by most .

    ‘The Catholic Church understands sexuality ‘

    So the world has noticed over the past couple of decades and apparently many of it’s Bishops and Cardinals and clergy are not without personal experience of understanding ‘sexuality’ as it were in the flesh frequently with minors .

    There are gobshites and there are gobshites and then there is Maskey 🙁

  • Nunoftheabove

    You’re more tiresome than most sermons, man. Go bash your bishop into your commemorative cassock, babes, the only jerk-off here’s you.

    Piss be with you, Onanist.

  • Greenflag

    Thats it Maggie . It’s Maskey’s natural home . I feel a boycott coming on .

  • Greenflag

    ‘this revolting poster poseur over the last few days and weeks.’

    Indeed ‘ 🙁 Time for a moderator to do what he/she ought to do !

  • fitzjameshorse1745

    There are about 42 cardinals who are Italian. But only about 20 of them are eligible to elect a Pope (age reasons).
    As Milan, Turin, Florence, Naples, Palermo, Venice, Bologna and Genoa are archdioceses which are traditionally led by a Cardinal (like Armagh, Westminster, St Andrews).
    The next highest is USA 17 (11 Electors), Spain 10 (5) Poland 8 (5) France 9 (5) Germany 7 (5) Brazil 8 (4)…..this from catholic’ which is slightly out of date….Card Daly is still “alive”

    The problem is not merely nationality…..its age remitted by the retirements of course but also the make up of liberal/conservative within the Curia.
    The conservative/liberal split is often cyclical.
    With John Paul 2 elected before he was 60 (ironically he was perceived as liberal) only 6 Cardinals were not appointed by JP2 or Benedict.
    Ironically that generation was more liberal than the numbers appinted by John Paul 2. But increasingly a number of them are approaching retirement or already retired and not on the electoral role.

    The likelihood is (and theres no certainty of course) that Benedicts papacy will not be long…hes in his mid 80s…so somewhere down the line generationally a more liberal pope is due.
    Thats how these things go.
    The simple fact is that the leading liberal or reconcilatory candidates are Italian.
    Its often considered that african/South American cardinals are “liberal” but they are usually “conservative” on religious issues and liberal on issues of social justice such as globalisation.

  • Alan Maskey

    I’d vote non italian. But I don’t have a vote. Pope Ben could have a few years in him. I guess he is more into theology and European issues than the social issues of Latin America, Africa and SE Asia. More than a new Pope, I reckon they need a new organisational structure. Big jamborees are fine and dandy to show the fisters how irrelevant they really are.
    But Christianity lacks the dynamism of Sunni or Shiite and the mainstream lacks the certainty of the whacko cults, which is why they are on the rise and mainstream Christian religions are stalling.
    The main problem the RCs have is delegating power and responsibility. A large part of the reason for that is many of these priests were kidnapped at an early age and denied the normal relationships of life. The priesthood is also a gerontocracy and that has to change for there to be a future. McKinsey, Patten and people like that are who the Churches need.

  • Greenflag

    malcolm redfellow ,

    Thanks for the reminder on Oliver Flanagan’s anti semitic rants . He was I believe a fan of Hitler as were indeed quite a few in Fine Gael /Blue Shirts at that time . Oswald Mosley went to ground in Ireland after the war and his release from jail. In Ireland he was a welcome figure because of his denunciations of the Black and Tans 30 years earlier.

    An old Armenian is on his deathbed:

    “My children, remember to protect the Jews.” “Why the Jews father ?”

    “Because once they are dealt with, we will be next.”

  • Archie Noble

    Malcolm you might want to consider Peter Tatchell’s contribution in this tome:

    The Betrayal of Youth, “Radical Perspectives on Childhood Sexuality, Intergenerational Sex, and the Social Oppression of Children and Young People”

    Peter Tatchell’s chapter made the case for the abolitition of the age of consent iirc. So I doubt we can move on. No matter how much he would like us to.

    Maggie “bigots and gobdaws”?
    I will dig some up tomorrow.

  • Alan Maskey

    Greenflag: The Armenian holocaust happened in 1915 so you have your analogies arseways. Probably the most moving Roman Catholic (affiliated) ceremony I ever attended was on April 24th with Armenians.

    Oliver J Flanagan – and thanks to MF for pointing him out – was a great vote getter. I believe he never missed a funeral in his constituency. He probably made a donation to get the gong and a few centuries off Purgagtory.

    Hard to know who is more reprehensible, him or the Kennedys.

    Mosley: I guess he thought Ireland was safer and I am sure he was well heeled. The legendary Otto Skorzeny also hung out in Ireland a little after the War. Then he moved to Spain.

    Where another legend, alleged serial rapist Larry Murphy now resides. In this Interent age, the Spanish are saying they do not want him. I am sure Mosley got few red carpets in Ireland. Flanagan only did what would increase his vote. I guess the Jew baiting in the fields of Mountmellick is worthy of a PhD or at least an academic paper.

  • More trolling 101

    1. I do believe we have a sock-puppet.

    2. I guessed this would be a good example of how the amateur troll exposes himself. So I checked it out. The amateur troll takes everything on trust, second- and fifth-hand, is careless about sources, but loud with allegations which rarely withstand scrutiny. As here.

    3. “Mr Noble”, of course, has picked up the title he quotes and has no knowledge of the nature of the source he cites. It would be instructive were he to tell us whether he learned of the existence of this text from (a) the pentacostalist “” (i.e. “Dr” Stephen Green) or (b) “Bwaj”, who has made essentially the same posting on the site twice to my knowledge (in connection with William Oddie’s piece of 29 July and again with Ann Arco’s piece of 8 Sep).

    The “facts” of the case:

    1. The proper title of the source is The Betrayal of Youth. The trolls prefer the extended sub-title, as publicised by “Dr” Stephen Green. It was published as far back as 1986 and contains 267 pages, including an eight-page bibliography.

    2. It does contain an essay by Peter Tatchell: Questioning Ages of Majority and Ages of Consent.

    3.As far as I can discover (having, like Mr “Noble”, no first-hand knowledge) Tatchell lays out the same argument as I quoted above, @ 6:13 pm.

    4. Even “Dr” Stephen Green, in his repetitious recycling of this canard, protects himself with the caveat: We should be clear that there is no evidence that Peter Tatchell was or ever has been a paedophile – but he certainly gave them support and was in company with them in “The Betrayal of Youth”.


    1. We have here an object lesson in “guilt by association”.

    2. Maskey/”Noble” is/are inimical to the usual exchange we enjoy on Slugger, and indeed to the norms of discourse. He seeks/they seek to taint and dislocate debate with baseless allegation and assertion.

    3. In this thread he is/they are prepared to stoop to the crudest misrepresentation and grossest libels.


    I assume that I, too, will now be subjected to similar abuse. The only question is: will it come from the organ-grinder or the monkey?

  • Apologies to all for the missing end-italics. These things happened less often when we had the editing facility.

  • Oh, but I am obtuse! Was it Greenflag who dropped the hint on another thread about “east of Suez”? if so, or whoever, forgive me for missing the clue.

    And, of course, “Archie Noble” is also the construct of the late George Macdonald Fraser, in The Reivers.

    A Flash in the pan?

  • Alias

    “I assume that I, too, will now be subjected to similar abuse.”

    Well, conclusion #2 (above) might precipitate that outcome if either party was bothered to defend a virtual reputation from the “baseless allegation and assertion” contained therein.

    Alex Maskey, I suspect, wouldn’t bother to register a sockpuppet account to cause offence since he is perfectly capable of doing that under his usual moniker. Archie Noble, our dashing agent, did not cite his source but that omission doesn’t make him a troll.

    And really, Malcolm, what is a man of your considerable intelligence bothering about such trivial e-matters for…?

  • Malcolm Redfellow

    I had been wondering….

  • … bothering about such trivial e-matters …

    What is Truth? said jesting Pilate; and would not stay for an answer. Certainly there be that delight in giddiness, and count it a bondage to fix a belief; affecting free-will in thinking, as well as in acting. And though the sects of philosophers of that kind be gone, yet there remain certain discoursing wits which are of the same veins, though there be not so much blood in them as was in those of the ancients. But it is not only the difficulty and labour which men take in finding out of truth; nor again that when it is found it imposeth upon men’s thoughts; that doth bring lies in favour; but a natural though corrupt love of the lie itself. One of the later school of the Grecians examineth the matter, and is at a stand to think what should be in it, that men should love lies, where neither they make for pleasure, as with poets, nor for advantage, as with the merchant; but for the lie’s sake. But I cannot tell: this same truth is a naked and open day-light, that doth not shew the masks and mummeries and triumphs of the world, half so stately and daintily as candle-lights. Truth may perhaps come to the price of a pearl, that sheweth best by day; but it will not rise to the price of a diamond or carbuncle, that sheweth best in varied lights. A mixture of a lie doth ever add pleasure. Doth any man doubt, that if there were taken out of men’s minds vain opinions, flattering hopes, false valuations, imaginations as one would, and the like, but it would leave the minds of a number of men poor shrunken things, full of melancholy and indisposition, and unpleasing to themselves?

    Bacon, Of Truth.

  • Alan Maskey

    Malcolm Redcap is at it agian, contradicting himself, doing guilt by association and all the other schoolboy debatng tricks. His low trick of linking me with Archie Noble is to make the impression that few if anty oppose or aerre repelled by the fisters and their agendas. For my own part, Peter Tatchell did not register much – he is a nobody parasise to me – until he used the Papal visit to further his own sick agenda. There are secular apologists aplenty for a pedophophilia and tatchell would have fitted easily into their camp.
    Pedophilia is truly global. The international pedophile community has its own specialized web sites and newsletters, written by specialists in a variety of sub-topics. These latter include Uncommon Desires newsletter which concentrates on pictures and stories dealing with “the social, erotic, and spiritual attraction to girls under the age of 16” and related topics. UDN’s purpose is “not to titillate, but to stimulate critical thought about desire and behavior in a variety of ways (as well as to celebrate desire itself).” Past issues have extolled the advantages of bonking under-age Lolitas. And the international academic community is in the thick of this movement.
    Mensa, for example, the society for people with high IQs and low morals, had its lofty image shattered in early 1999 after one of their newsletters advocated the pedophiles’ cause. Satyricon included an article by “Robert B” calling for child pornography to be legalized and more widely disseminated. Mensa’s newsletter was widely distributed amongst its own under-age members, the so-called Bright Sparks. Frank Mitchell, the newsletter’s secretary, said that they were only interested in the titillations of Kiddi-porn from a dry, scientific viewpoint, that they were scientists, not perverts, itself a pejorative, insensitive, non-inclusive word.
    The Journal of Pedophilia, Paidika, describes itself as “a scholarly journal, which seeks to examine the range of cultural, historical, psychological, and literary issues pertaining to consensual adult-child sexual relationships and desires.” The Journal claims it is attempting to create a “history of record”, that it is subject to academic peer-review by fellow-pedophiles and, because it is subscribed to by a number of prestigious copyright institutions, including the British Library and the Library of Congress, it is academically and socially respectable. Because sick academics have given it the stamp of approval, it must be ok. It must also be morally ok to have sex with children!
    NAMBLA, the North American Man-Boy Love Association, was once the lone voice lobbying for the normalization of pedophilia. This was until 1990, when the more mainstream Journal of Homosexuality produced a special bumper issue condoning adult-child sex. The edition asked parents to facilitate adults having “educational” sex with their children. British and American academics wrote articles saying that children are usually the predators, the seducers, and that such abuse is character-developing.
    The Journal of Homosexuality hit a receptive chord. In response, The American Psychological Association published a major study written by one of those same Journal of Homosexuality writers in its own Psychological Bulletin. The authors, unsurprisingly given their subjectivity, concluded that when the sexual contact is not coerced and is enjoyed, it may not be harmful at all. The article’s authors demanded that their fellow-psychologists stop using judgmental terms like child abuse, molestation, and victims, but replace them with neutral, value-free, inclusive terms like adult-child sex and the like. Similarly, they say we should not talk about the severity of the abuse, but instead refer to the level of sexual intimacy and how meaningful to both parties was the relationship. The authors conclude that behavior which psychotherapists commonly term abuse may merely constitute a violation of social norms. And science, they say, should separate itself from social-moral terminology. Although these writers argue that religion and society are free to judge behavior as they wish, they believe that psychiatry should evaluate behavior by its own set of standards. If the immature child and the predatory adult can agree that it is a meaningful relationship, who are we — or the child’s parents — to disagree?
    Certainly, many top academics don’t see anything wrong with having it off with kiddies. As Dr. John Money, a sexologist Professor Emeritus at Johns Hopkins University has put it: “If I were to see the case of a boy aged ten or eleven who’s intensely erotically attracted toward a man in his twenties or thirties, if the relationship is totally mutual, and the bonding is genuinely totally mutual then I would not call it pathological in any way.” Money, if he was watching an adult anally or orally penetrate a small child, would see nothing wrong with it — or, we can presume, his own voyeurism — as long as all three enjoyed it and as long as the rapist was under 40 years of age.
    Paidika, which advocates consensual child sodomy and fellatio, has, in other words, powerful academic supporters to pen, referee and rubber stamp their articles for them. The editorial board includes a veritable army of highly-qualified Dutch pedophiles as well as Dr. Vern L. Bullough, Dean, Faculty of Natural and Social Science, State University College Buffalo; Prof. Dr. John P De Cecco, Department of Psychology, San Francisco State University, and Dr. Wayne Dynes, Department of Art, Hunter College (CCNY). The Paidika Foundation is a registered, US non-profit corporation. North American donations are tax-deductible. Not surprisingly, perhaps, so too are deductions in the aptly named Netherlands.

  • Alan Maskey

    Bottom line: Homosexual apologists for having sex with children abound. They were much more vociferous in this at the time Mr Tatchell wrote the offending piece. The Catholic Church has little if anytihng to do with the spread of HIV in the bathhouses, saunas, public toilets and dogging sites the “gay comunity” use for their get togethers.

  • Alan Maskey

    Malcolm Sadfellow and Peter Thatchell would have been in their heyday at the time of the Maoists, David Vipond and the Little Red Book. Though the Maoists were straight laced sexually, (there was an angel of a babe with them), the same cannot be said for The Little Red Book. We all know Mao bonked liked crazy and did not wash or even clean his teeth but I do not refer to his opus but to this:
    This best seller advocated bonking children and was on open sale throughout the 1970s. It was popular with hedonist types, people like the draft dodging Tatchell. Are we to believe he did not read it, did not believe, even as his buddies did?
    It is also funny but predictable hearing for tolerance here for simply pointing out the foibles of this group, who include such Irish luminaries as Jim Gibney and Skelly, Johhny Adair’s side kick. I exclude David Norris as I do not think he is gay. Rather, I believe he pretends to be to get on the many gravy trains his alleged sexuality has allowed him to board.

  • Sadly, Maskey’s unoriginal thoughts are a grave breach of the copyright properly belonging to one, Declan Hayes. Compare the above, verbatim), with pages 110-112 of The Japanese disease: sex and sleaze in modern Japan.

    At least when I quote I give the reference.

  • Told you so! “Guilt by association”! See Corollary to my post above @ 3:52 am.

    In the best Corbett and Barker semi-sock-puppet mode:
    So it’s “Goodnight” from me.
    And it’s “Goodnight” from him.

    I have a plane to catch.

  • Alan Maskey

    Malcolm: Yes, I got it from here as you did:
    As I said, Peter Tatchell did not register much on my radar. I did note in passing his political trials and travails but paid no great attention to them.
    He and others are linking the Pope by association so why not do the same with them?
    Prof Money, quoted above was an odd ball. So too was Kinsey and his flawed research. There was a close link between the homosexual and paedophilia movements at least up until the early 1990s.

  • Farewell thoughts from under the shower:

    Your opponents you want to confoodle
    With snippets you rip off of Google,
    But their knack, which you lack,
    Is to cross-reference back,
    So you end up looking a noodle.

    Boom! Boom! Byee!

  • Alan Maskey

    Reading through Peter Tatchell’s Wikipedia entry, his early years seem to be a bit vague. He fought for Aboriginal rights (high profile fighter?) and then buggered off to England just before being drafted. I had imagined he only came out as being a sodomite after being selected or deselected as a candidate. His Wikipedia entry says he had fought the goods fight prior to that.
    Either way, he was a rising luminary in the Homo movement when The Little Red Book and NAMBLA were at their zenith. The quote, rightly or wrongly attributed to him, of supporting man-boy love, would not have been considered extreme in the homo movement at the time. There are, by all Google accounts, colonies of these types of people in Bali and other places where old farts take on young tarts. Obviously NAMBLA types need all the allies they can get and, at the time, the homo movement, especially its more radical fringes like Tatchell’s Outrage, would have been obvious potential allies. There is sufficient evidence that this was the case.
    On the flip side of the coin, the chief RC Archbishop for England and Wales made the point on the BBC2 Papal visit post mortem love in that they handed over an offending priest in the 1970s but he was only fined a few hundred quid. The archbishop made the point that it was not considered a big crime in the 1970s. Certainly, tomes like the Little Red Book (not Mao’s) thought lightly of it and believed it to be progressive. Prof Money and Kinsey had track records of kiddy fiddling themselves. This would indicate that the quote attributed to Tatchell is fair: that he most likely supported such activities at least in the 1970s.
    This does not leave the RC Church off the hook. The problems it has to address are to do more with the lack of accountability and its opaqueness. The era of deferring to a priest is probably almost at an end in any event. Society has changed. And so must religion. Maybe Peter the Roman, the next and last Pope, will do a big change.
    Even if the world does not end with the next Pope, the papacy may have to. The organisational structure of the RCC has run its course. The RCC commissars need new blood. But that is antithetical to Rome’s dependence on gerontocracy.

  • Alan Maskey

    Some more from Tatchell’s Wikipedia entry (I skip the part of him smashing up religious services). This bit does indicate he would have been in step with the Nambla advocates

    Age of consent laws
    In 1996 Tatchell led an OutRage! campaign to reduce the age of consent to 14 to adjust for studies which showed nearly half of all young people – gay and straight – had their first sexual experiences prior to 16 years old and to counter them from being “treated as criminals by the law”.[40] The campaign positioned there should be no prosecution at all if the difference between the ages of the sexual partners was no more than three years – and providing it is backed up by earlier, more effective sex education in schools.[40] He was quoted in the OutRage! press release as saying “Young people have a right to accept or reject sex, according to what they feel is appropriate for them”.[41] Leo McKinstry, in The Sun called it “a perverts’ charter”.[42]

    In a 1997 letter to The Guardian, Tatchell defended an academic book about ‘boy-love’, calling the work “courageous” before writing:

    The positive nature of some child-adult sexual relationships is not confined to non-Western cultures. Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy. While it may be impossible to condone paedophilia, it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful.[43]

    Here he is following the direct line of Nambla.

  • Nunoftheabove

    Not sure why you’re making such a big play of Tatchell in all this other than to rehearse your ignorance generally and your homophobia specifically, he doesn’t seem a particularly significant figure in relation to anything as far as I can see.

    Presumably you’ve read the Ryan and Murphy reports incidentally ?

  • Greenflag

    arseways ?

    Learn to read . Where is the reference to the Armenian holocaust ?

    The old Armenian on his deathbed could have been replaced by a gay person , a gypsy , a Russian , or a Pole or a Fenian or a Jaffa head or indeed anybody from any part of the Earth – but that would not occur to your simplistic mind would it !

    ‘Oliver J Flanagan was a great vote getter.’

    So was Hitler.

    East of Suez then or is it ole Flash Harry masked as usual ?

  • Alan Maskey

    Nunoftheabove: I find your approach interesting in a negative way. Mr Tatchell expresses outrage against a large number of people, including the Pope. I am interested, not obsessively so, to see what makes him tick. He seems to be a career protester, mostly of the “rights” of predominantly male middle class people, many of whom engage in bizarre and risky sex practices both publicly and privately. Has Mr Tatchell a policy on the fisting fraternity and on dogging and hanging out in public urinals? Are there any numbers on the percentage of homos who frequent such places?

    You are the one in need of help for your phobias. You think it is ok or Tatchell and his ilk to ruin their terror campaigns and that these hunters should answer some plain truths themselves.

    Yes, I have rad the reports you mention. Do you read anything else?

  • Greenflag

    Malcolm Redfellow,

    Indeed . On one post above he manages to get Oliver Flanagan, Otto Skorzeny, Mosley, Purgatory, Mountmellick , Jew baiting, and Larry Murphy jumbled up together forgetting his point if his post had one .

    Troll it is and probably East of Suez at that . Wherever matters not . Best to ignore the idiot and give him more time to attend his affiliated religious ceremonies with the Armenians 😉

  • Greenflag

    Twas Greenflag- guilty as charged . This Maskey is a pseud and poseur and imo probably not even an RC . I would’nt bother replying to the idiot.

    Most of us on slugger or those who have been around for a while eventually recognise the ‘wolf’ when the sheep’s clothing begins to shed . Maskey’s time is up . Truth will out .

  • Nunoftheabove

    I think that Tatchell is a bit of a serial campaigner and talks his share of bollocks, odd bits of sense too. As a staright male I’m unqualified to comment on his value as a campaigner for gay rights.

    I just don’t see how his sexual preference would be of any interest to anyone to the extent that you’re demonstrating other than for reasons of prurience. Yes, a number of middle (and other)class men (and women) do engage in risky sex – where’s the evidence that this is more the case with gay folk than with straight folk ? And what has the privacy or otherwise of the sexual act got to do with its riskiness exactly ?

    I’m not sure what phobias you believe I have or on what you may base any assumptions as to what they might be.

  • Alan Maskey

    I earlier recommended Randy Shilts’ excellent book on the beginning of the HIV scene in the US. He paints the gay sauna scenes as hotbeds of promiscuity. They were closed down for a while because of their role as a major vector in HIV transmission.
    Anal sex is much riskier than vaginal sex and some of the homosexual crowd go way beyond that. I am sure most homosexuals want to live their lives in peace and find him a right pain. I am also sure the Catholic priesthood has more than its fair share of repressed closet homosexuals.
    I do not want to be seen as fideii defensor. However, the Catholic Church is not alone in its hypocrisies and holier than thou attitudes. Its most virulent critics reek of it.

  • Nunoftheabove

    I’m not sure anyone’s say it’s alone; what grates is the extent to which it excuses itself and dodges its plain criminal culpability and if all else fails say that God or his go-to guy in the Vatican figures it’s OK so nothing to worry about.

    Incidentally I assume you know that – and this may come as a shock to you – some ladies and gentlemen also partake of some of the practices to which you refer, some safely, others unsafely. Their membership of a particular ‘crowd’ would though, I’d imagine, have very little indeed to do with their choices. Your issue is that you resent and fear male on male love whether it’s safe or not.

    You’d do well incidentally sweetie to adhere to Randy Shilts principle that he tried to tell the truth and if he couldn’t be objective then he at least tried to be fair.

    Don’t think there’s much danger of you being seen by anyone as fidei defensor either babes but the thought is of amusement value to me so thanks for that.

  • Greenflag

    You rad the reports ?

    But you obviously failed to understand them 🙁
    Homophobia is a mental illness .

    Go and get some professional help !

  • Neil

    The homophobia on display is a mirror image of the athiestic vitriol directed towards Pope Benedict. Two sets of people, grossly intolerant of the private behaviours and practices of a group of other people whom they intend to take fuck all to do with.

    They should rope all the fundies (religious and athiestic) together and leave them to ‘convert’ each other. I do heed my own advice though, and I don’t feed trolls.

  • Alan Maskey

    I am not phobic about anything, except things that may spread diseases. Is the British Red Cross homophobic for refusing to take blood from any man who has sex with men?

    The radical homosexual campaigners are, wait for it, Nazis. Now let’s look at the Nazis for a second. The SA seemed to specialise in bonking each other and the “mainstream” Nazis were, their laws apart, very much that way inclined. The street brawling shock and awe tactics of Mr Tatchell and his ilk smack of that same hard edged approach the Nazis so liked. Not saying they are Nazis but ……

    I know several Roman Catholic choirs which are staffed entirely by homosexuals, both Catholic and non Catholic. They do it for a social outlet. I know Muslims who sing Christmas carols along with the choirs they belong to.

    They are not under the cosh here. It is the radical trouble makers who make a profession out of protesting and of insulting religions, the Catholic religion in particular, dressing up as priests, nuns and bishops.

    They protest at the cost of parades but hold counter parades themselves and burn up police time. They have their own parades and insist on gate crashing others, such as the St Pats day Parades.
    Many people disapprove of dogging, a disgustng term they themselves use. As regards fisting and the drug cocktailes they take, no wonder they get diseases. Not that they care. One of their latest things is to give each other the gift (of Aids).

    It is sad you think those who point out the shortcomings of these professional disruptives are the sick ones.

    Looking up the definition of homopobia, we see it is not an illness but something of degree. We all know plenty of homosexuals. Many of us do not want to know the agitators with the murky backgrounds and the murkier pastimes.
    And while it may be good they are, however belatedly, into condoms, it would be nice if the doggers could pick them up after them.
    These people should not be ctaken seriously.

  • Nunoftheabove

    Gate-crashing St Pats? So gay people aren’t Irish now by definition, is that right ?

    I’m not a dogger myself and fail to see the appeal to be honest but if consenting adults ( I’m not sure where you get the idea that dogging is only or predomantly a gay activity incidentally – it ain’t)want to do it and indulge in it safely (something catholicism expressly forbids them to do, let’s bear in mind), they can merrily knock themselves out for all anyone else should care.

    Incidentally I’m not trying to convert anyone to atheism, lest their be any doubt about that. Not actually sure someone abandoning sinister nonsense like religion and adopting reason as theur guiding principle in life can technically be described as conversion, to be honest. I do though resent their insistence on dominating the public square and resent subsidizing them and their involvement in public life and any intrusion or attempted intrusion into my life and will reserve my right to resist that and more generally challenge their dangerous and irrational perspective.

  • Archie Noble

    You are a bit over excited here Malcolm. Tatchell’s views are a matter of record over a very long period. To refer to them is hardly trolling given his prominent role in the anti popery protests, the nature of the protests and the title of this thread.

    I have been involved in some very serious child abuse cases and have supervised staff required to work directly with serial offenders. I know the language and I know the literature. I have seen the victims and the perpetrators. I am not an evangelical in any sense of the word.

    I will not be abusing you in any fashion. I think you should have used sock puppet rather than troll but in any case not so.

  • Alan Maskey

    Archie Noble: He thinks we are one and the same. That probably does not say very much about your typing if it resembles mine.
    You/I/we have been called a lot worse than sock puppets.
    No point reguritating as it detracts.

    Nunoftheabove: The AOH organise the St Pat’s Day parades in Ameiica as a family event. Just because politicians have hijacked them does not give homos the right to do the same. The same goes for the St Pat’s Day marches in Dublin and Cork. Why do the homos want to march, except to self publicise. They have their own narcissistic marches in any event. Why gatecrach where they do not belong?
    The march is not for the Irish. Many of the bands in Ireland are not Irish. Spectatrs are. But the homo extemists are not happy with that. They must be centre stage.

    You say religion dominates the public square. The Pope and the evidence disagree. This was the purpose of the post: to say that British tolerance won out.
    The British may, by and large, be tolerant. But the Kenyan Dawkins is not. And nor is the Australian Tatchell. They too want centere stage.
    I would imagine dogging is the antithesis of safe sex and of safety in general. Exposing oneself in public is also against the law. It is also an appalling display of manners. The least they could do is pick up their c9ondoms after them. Those of them who bother with them.
    Hedonistic behaviour is at the heart of a lot of the homo world. Most homos, I imagine just want to get on with their lives, with a minimum of fuss or hassle. Like most adults, I know quite a few and it is not an issue.
    However, evangelists like Tatchell are a different matter. They grate.