Peter Reynolds

The life and times of Peter Reynolds

Of Vital Importance

with 54 comments

An extraordinary, incisive and passionate exposition of the truth about the Catholic Church.

Here is the Q&A session from the same debate also featuring Anne Widdecombe, an African Archbishop and Christopher Hitchens.

Written by Peter Reynolds

December 26, 2010 at 6:02 pm

54 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. So f*****g what? These are just pseudo-intellectual toffs admiring their own style of syntactic delivery. All this absurdity of the Catholic Church was a long long time ago. And sure they still these days love their choirboys, but there’s far worse out there to be concerned about. For example Zionism, and it’s control over modern politics.

    I think that while we’re all going through this period of incredible (manipulated) economic and political challenge people need their faiths most, however ridiculous they may seem to others. Certainly the atheists have the very weakest of all cases. It could be as some have said that Jesus himself is a myth; and he might be. And the same people who brought us the destruction of the Twin Towers in New York could in fact have brought us a fake Jesus religion to soften up a Europe otherwise resistant to the infiltration of sleazy semitic superstition. But surely that is something we can analyse and worry about later once we’re through the challenge. And besides it is not really such a bad myth now is it? Would you really want universal Noahide laws and a two-tier religious structure. Would that really be so much better than a preacher of peace, however fabulous?

    Rupert Tiger

    December 26, 2010 at 7:09 pm

    • I wish I understood your point.

      If only you were right that “this absurdity of the Catholic Church was a long long time ago”. It’s continues in the present day, even this very month. See: As for “the atheists have the very weakest of all cases”, I doubt that even the religious zealots would agree with that.

      I agree with your concern about the Zionists, the new Nazis, but your message is unfathomable. You’re obviously very angry but what is your point?

      Peter Reynolds

      December 26, 2010 at 8:41 pm

      • Hello Pete,

        Perhaps because I don’t really understand your point on this issue; I do pretty much everything else.

        I am unable to discern from your writings on this particular topic if you are a Protestant (i.e. anti-Catholic) Reformer, or just against religion altogether (an evangelical atheist).

        Rupert Tiger

        December 26, 2010 at 11:43 pm

      • Rupert, I believe the video presented here deals with the Catholic Church crimes through out the whole of history (and continuing).

        It certainly does not deal with atheists, or even Peter Reynolds writing; but good try πŸ˜‰

        Next, I advised you to write something regarding wikileaks or any other current, more *distractive* matter.


        December 27, 2010 at 4:20 pm

      • Stick it up your arse.

        Rupert Tiger

        December 27, 2010 at 4:32 pm

      • “Stick it up your arse”

        Sadly, many Catholic priests are only too willing to do so. It’s a bit of bugger!


        January 1, 2011 at 4:46 pm

      • Rupert, I call myself an agnostic in that I definitely believe in a God which I would define as a supreme intelligence composed of collective consciousness in that we are all part of God. It might also be closely allied to the idea of “Mother Nature”. I believe that when we die our consciousness merges back into the whole and each new individual is a new expression of the whole.

        I despise organised religion based simply on an examination of the evidence. On balance, it has proved itself to be a force for evil. However, there has also been great good done in the name of religion and there are many good religious people. I respect anyone’s right to follow any faith they choose. Also, there are religions e.g. Buddhism, Hinduism which don’t have the dreadful record of others e.g. Christianity, Islam.

        Let’s be clear though, I do particularly condemn the Catholic Church and I am outraged that the BBC is run by a hardcore Catholic who turns this magnificent institution to his own, yes, evil ends.

        Peter Reynolds

        December 28, 2010 at 9:53 am

      • Sorry I took up your invitation to contribute. Go and f**ck yourself you major f***ing useless disappointment. You pathetic idiotic c**t.

        Rupert Tiger

        December 27, 2010 at 4:36 pm

      • Your language is pathetic, offensive and demeans you.

        You are very welcome here but please moderate your language. Self-evidently you have the intelligence and vocabulary not to have to descend to such a level so please, grow up and have some self-respect and respect for others here.

        I will continue to edit out any bad language.

        Peter Reynolds

        December 28, 2010 at 9:56 am

    • “Would that really be so much better than a preacher of peace”

      If they were just preachers of peace, that’d be fine. Problem is they’re not. They may not be calling for a religious war in the way that some muslims are, but they are still waging one.

      Kids are born and die with AIDS in Africa, not because it couldn’t be avoided, but because the catholic lot have been teaching that the use of a condom is sinful.

      People are killed around the world because of someone elses beliefs. I don’t just mean terrorist attacks and the like, think about those who work in abortion clinics. We can condemn the perpetrators as ‘extremists’ and ‘fundamentalists’ but the fact of the matter is, religion gave them the excuse to kill.

      There are endless examples of religion causing harm, not to mention ‘faithful’ governments clamping down on their electorate to ‘protect’ them (Australian firewall anyone?). I’ll concede, though, that it’s not just religion that is used in this way.

      I’ve no issue with people practicising their own religions, but when they attempt to force it upon me (what else would you call saturation coverage of the Pope’s visit?) I start to get upset.

      Talking of which, you mention the financial environment, would you say that we are really in a position where we (as taxpayers) can afford to subsidise the Pope’s visit to blighty?

      For someone espousing the benefits of Religion, you seem to have a very dim view of the Jews! Your views are your views, but I often find it amusing when I’m told that religion teaches morality and tolerance!

      Personally, I’ll judge a person by what they do and say. But then, I suppose it probably requires an element of logic that the ‘faithful’ seem to lack.

      @Peter: Thanks for another interesting post!


      December 26, 2010 at 11:43 pm

      • You sound like such a well-round, considered contributor, but your response is so one-dimensional, bigoted even. So many built-in assumptions that your reader must accept to follow your thread; assumptions that we derive only from the mainstream media.

        And I never said I was religious.

        Rupert Tiger

        December 26, 2010 at 11:51 pm

      • Hi Rupert,

        To be fair, I was largely expecting you to provide the other side πŸ˜‰

        Not sure of which assumptions you speak though. It’s known that the CC have been preaching against Condoms for a very long time (although, to be fair, I note the Pope did reverse the stance slightly recently). Incidentally, just re-read what I posted, I didn’t mean every kid that dies of AIDS is the fault of the church!!

        It’s widely accepted (or so I’m told, anyway) that the Conservative Government is Aus bowed to pressure from religious groups, which resulted in the firewall. The ‘proof’ for this is tenuous at best, so I’ll concede it’s quite flimsy!

        There is plenty of documentation supporting the claim that people have been killed of others beliefs. I’ll accept, however, that one must consider whether the murderer was telling the truth when he claimed it was for religious reasons.

        Re: the Popes visit, I’d have had no problem with even a few hours a day. Or maybe highlights, but four days of non-stop coverage? That said, I’m pretty grumpy when it comes to TV schedules, that disdain applies to almost everything – religion, football etc. It probably sounds like I resent it far more than I do, in the scale of things it is but a small irritation.

        You’re quite right though, you never said you were religious. An assumption I made whilst typing! Out of interest, are you? Not that it matters except to satisfy my curiosity.

        I recognise that I often come across as a little one-sided when it comes to religion. The problem is, it’s been a long time since I’ve been able to understand, even a little, how people can believe what they do. To me, it seems so illogical and dependant on blind acceptance of ‘facts’. But then, I assume they probably view me in much the same way!

        I’ve had some pretty vile things said to me my religious people on the basis of my lack of faith, it’s one of the things that makes me question religion so much. But then, we all have our own bias!

        Slightly of topic, but interesting (to me);

        Scientology – Religion or Cult (or other!)


        December 27, 2010 at 12:06 am

      • Hi Pete,

        That’s nice! Thanks.

        It’s too tedious to discuss the horrors delivered upon us throughout history by the various religions; we all know of them only too well. But that doesn’t mean that just because ‘we’ don’t like their incredible behaviour that there might not be physics out there that we just don’t know about yet.

        I’m pleased to see you have qualified your earlier claims. That’s cool. The only ones remaining are those about AIDS and abortion. I’m going to answer these two points now. To do this first I tell about my own ‘beliefs’, as you have asked:

        I am an engineer. I try to base all my opinions only on my own experience and reasoning. In this sense it would be essentially Buddhistic, heavily influenced by a lifetime consuming gigantic quantities of cannabis, and some Scientology courses (very perceptive!). I have frequent out-of-body experiences, and am able to project an invisible consciousness into inner and outer space and visit other dimensions and worlds. I’m like a space traveller who’s a bit stuck for a while here on Earth. I’m not sure quite why Earth, why now, but I suspect it is because we’re in for a big change of popular perception. That latter is more of a guess/feeling/hope than anything else though. It all could be remnant brain function, but I seriously doubt it. It all however makes the gross materialism of the engineer seem ridiculous – whether we like it or not, matter simply cannot animate itself! No more than a universe can be created out of nothing. Scientology: I’ve only done three of their courses, about 15 years ago. Their people and personal style suck, but their technology is fantastic. If you don’t want to put the hard effort into five years of serious meditation as I did, Scientology can routinely help their ‘customers’ project out the body. It is a religion because it enjoys the tax breaks. It is a cult because it is feared and despised by the religions. The truth is about Scientology it is technology which exists in and for itself, it is the nearest thing to extra-terrestrial knowledge. If I had the money I would do all their courses; but I don’t. Central to it all of course is that man is fundamentally a spiritual entity; pure dimensionless spirit. Everything that ‘it’ does is only an adventure no matter how apparently serious events and circumstances might seem to one at any particular time.

        Having said that it should come as no surprise if you learn that I disagree then that abortion is somehow acceptable. I think it is murder; it is killing a ‘young being’. I wouldn’t want to kill an abortionist, but I could easily make a very good case for it. At least people should have the courtesy of accepting that whilst we may ‘abort’ it should be something we should ideally best avoid.

        AIDS is a hoax; there is no link with HIV. This latter is also too tedious to explain, but you will just have to accept that is what my extensive research into the subject has indicated to me. It is a hoax of big Pharma, just as 9/11 is a hoax and the manned lunar landings are a hoax. The Catholic objection to condoms is reasonable to me on the grounds that condoms prevent the cycles of living energy/spirit (whatever) being completed naturally without artificial blockage. I know this might seem objectionable to you, but the condom issue is a ‘red herring’ deflecting attention from the greater context of regional exploitation, poverty, poor health, lack of fresh water, lack of fresh fruit and vegetables, lack of fresh cannabis etc.

        Does that help?

        Rupert Tiger

        December 27, 2010 at 12:59 am

      • Time to stop smoking Rupert. You strike me as one who’s belief in their own intelligence has clouded all vision.

        AIDS and 911 conspiracy theory’s… I suspect your a little paranoid and spend too much time thinking on what if’s.

        I’m sure you’ll be able to offer some form of curt response which, in its self will further compound your message of self worth but really dude, allow your vast intelligence the opportunity to consider Peter’s argument. There is overwhelming evidence as to the deep corruption now and throughout history specific to the RC church. Surely one as bright yourself can see this truth.


        December 27, 2010 at 11:28 am

      • You and I seem to be of one mind on this.

        Peter Reynolds

        December 28, 2010 at 9:58 am

      • Hi Peter,

        Perhaps thats why Rupert got us confused πŸ˜‰

        I have to admit, I’ve always wondered how many Catholics believe in everything that comes out of the Vatican. When pressed, I’d imagine a fair few would agree that some of the teachings are very harmful (AIDS is probably a good example).

        The problem is, many people cannot detatch faith from logical thought. It’s something I’ve noticed when people talk about Julian Assange and the pending legal stuff in Sweden, many cannot fathom that although he may have done some good stuff (if that’s what Wikileaks is in your mind) that doesn’t automatically mean that he can’t do anything bad.

        It seems to be much the same with religion. I hesitate to call it brainwashing, as it’s not necessarily a deliberate act on the part of the worshipped. More an innate inability to separate two different aspects of something.

        It gets easier when time passes, most would now agree the crusades were horrific, but had they been more recent, some would probably continue to support them.

        For my part, I’m less religious than the computer on my lap. But if someone else wants to practise than that’s up to them. It’s the hardcore evangelical stuff I can’t stand, which is where the BBC have failed. Similarly, those who search forums in order to post pro-religion comments can quickly become irritating (I’m not accusing anyone here of this, but try searching YouTube for religious comments!)

        There’s a lot out there that we don’t yet understand, and even more that we may never understand. Personally, I don’t think that includes a deity, but I can’t say for sure. I’m sure enough that I’ll probably never believe (pending new evidence!) but not so sure that I could call everyone else an idiot for believing.

        @Rupert, if you’re still about – I am actually curious to know more. If you want to talk about it more, drop me a line. I’m never going to ‘convert’, but I am interested into gaining a better insight into anyone elses beliefs.


        December 28, 2010 at 3:22 pm

  2. I’ve not smoked for six months or more.

    You don’t need to remind me of how to respond, thank you. I am well aware too of all the arguments, and I am sure Peter (if this is indeed not he) is capable of defending his own position without you.

    I simply find it interesting the speed at which you need to pull out the abuse when your questions were apparently well-meaning. I certainly answered you honestly, and with respect. If you don’t agree, that’s fine. But you have offered no reason, just the patronising abuse.

    You just confirm that which I said earlier ‘…your response is so one-dimensional, bigoted even.’

    Rupert Tiger

    December 27, 2010 at 12:43 pm

    • lol


      December 27, 2010 at 4:27 pm

      • Pathetic c**t.

        Rupert Tiger

        December 27, 2010 at 4:34 pm

  3. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Peter Reynolds, Shaun Hankey. Shaun Hankey said: Of Vital Importance: – Best Stephen Fry performance ever! 10 mins..must see […]

  4. No-ones confirmed anything..I’m not Peter x


    December 27, 2010 at 1:37 pm

    • Go and shag your mother.

      Rupert Tiger

      December 27, 2010 at 4:33 pm

  5. Extra-Ordinary

    I just want to be him right there saying those same words!

    Jammy bugger!


    December 27, 2010 at 4:03 pm

    • Buggering you, saying those words!

      Rupert Tiger

      December 27, 2010 at 4:35 pm

  6. F**k you all wankers. What are all you establishment stiffs doing on a famous pothead’s site anyway.

    Rupert Tiger

    December 27, 2010 at 4:31 pm

    • Rupert,

      Apologies for the delay in replying, went to bed last night and haven’t been near the laptop since.

      Just to clarify, I’m not Peter.

      I’ll confess I read your previous reply to me last night, and it took me back a bit. As you’ll no doubt know, Scientology has a bad reputation. I’d had a fair few drinks last night (Xmas and all that!) so I decided to postpone responding!

      Since then, a well-rounded argument seems to have descended into name calling. Not good, if only because it’ll make others question your ability to form a well presented argument (says the guy who’s taken 24 hours to respond!)

      I still can’t see where you think I’ve been bigoted, but then viewpoints do differ.

      Although I’m not religious, I have different issues with the different religions. Many have one thing in common – violence and hatred. As you’ll know, there are numerous reports of Scientology perpetrating this. It could be a ‘creation’ of the establishment, but the aggressive attitude you are displaying hardly helps to counter that.

      Catholicism has a long and violent past, and that is part of what is being criticised in the video. It doesn’t really extend to other religions per se. That’s not to say that I don’t see one major flaw common in all religions (i.e. the belief, without proof, in a deity).

      In answer to your final, I’m here because I support the campaign for the legalisation of medical herbal cannabis. I’d certainly be curious to know whether Scientology has anything to say about the matter?


      December 28, 2010 at 12:57 am

  7. Have you seen this Peter?

    A potential platform to further the cause?


    December 28, 2010 at 8:42 pm

    • I have Nick. I am ready to submit two proposals, one on a reform, regulate and tax regime for cannabis and one on permitting the prescription of quality controlled medicinal herbal cannabis by a doctor.

      Peter Reynolds

      December 28, 2010 at 10:07 pm

      • Funnily enough Peter, that was my first thought when I read it. Then I saw the bit about rules on elibility, and I’m guessing they’ll discard any of the above as ineligible!

        Perhaps I’m too cynical though. Definitely worth the effort in either case


        December 28, 2010 at 11:03 pm

      • We can only hope.


        December 29, 2010 at 11:39 am

  8. Yet again sexual deviants and Psuedo intellectuals hitting on something other thasn Islam because they are cowards.

    Funny Islam hates Homosexuals, Lesbians and all that which these idiots like, yet do they attack that? No because like most of their kind they are cowards!


    December 29, 2010 at 9:36 pm

  9. I have no respect or time for those on here, or those in this video who would not do the same thing in public about ISLAM!

    Have a debate about the Paedophiles coming to this Country and raping children, Mulsim Men raping women in their hundreds! The child killings, the beatings, the crime, the violence, the flagrant disregard of British culture and tradition all brought here in the name of ISLAM!

    The violent child abuser called Mohammed, the stonings, the underage marriages practised in large numbers, Sharia law and all the other crap that has been brought into this country but has yet to fully unleash itself.

    Lets see any of you have such a frank and open attack on THAT!


    December 29, 2010 at 9:49 pm

    • David,

      I don’t disagree with what you say about Islam. Some of it’s followers are absolute monsters (note: not all). But how does focusing on Catholicism detract from that? The issue of the Christian Church is far more pressing in the UK given the ‘support’ the BBC seems to lend it.

      I’d also point out that generally and statistically speaking, paedophiles don’t come to this country and rape children. Or more accurately, don’t come to this country for that purpose. Contrary to what you may have read in the Daily Mail, most child abusers are actually related to the unfortunate victim.

      As for Muslim men raping women in their hundreds – got a link? That’s a pretty sensationalist claim!! That said, anyone committing rape should be strung up IMO, but that’s a separate issue to that of religion.

      Sharia Law is not in the UK, Muslim’s may resolve issues under sharia court, but it has to be rubber stamped by a British court. So honour killings, stonings etc cannot and will never legally happen in the UK.

      Having said all that, the little research I have done into Islam does suggest quite a violent religion. More so, in it’s teachings at least, than Christianity. Both have violent histories and both have and are doing serious harm to the people of this world.

      Strangely enough, the issue arises from something the two have in common – the overriding need to convert/kill non-believers.

      I take from your tone that you are anti-gay (amongst other things)? That suggests to me that you may be very religious (although clearly not a muslim!). I’d certainly be interested to talk to you more, if only to try and understand your viewpoint.

      Slightly OT, but how would you define the term ‘sexual deviant’? I ask because, as far as I can tell, there’s no sexual norm anymore. OK you can class it as homo or hetero, but there’s so many subcultures beyond that. Is anything other than missionary a deviation, or is BDSM etc now OK? I’m not taking the piss, I’m genuinely curious (I found a fascinating website a while back discussing the Bibles view on sexual pastimes, it allows a surprising amount apparantly!)


      December 29, 2010 at 10:32 pm

  10. Focusing on Catholicism detracts from it because yet again it is another attack on the Christian Faith by the left and yet again no such attack on Islam, therefore I call them cowards. I never said stonings etc happened in the UK so do not try to manipulate what was said, although murders for the same reasons do happen here under Islam all too frequently.

    Go see the proper numbers on Crimes by immigrants,better still go and find some mainstream outlets that will publish them!

    BTW I am neither a catholic or a Christian, I just don’t like traitors or cowards.


    December 29, 2010 at 10:46 pm

    • “The violent child abuser called Mohammed, the stonings, the underage marriages practised in large numbers, Sharia law and all the other crap that has been brought into this country but has yet to fully unleash itself. ”

      No manipulation needed, the implication is there (at least in my mind).

      Yes Honour Killings do happen in this country, and quite frankly it’s a miserable state of affairs. But it’s no just Muslims doing the killing is it?

      Whilst some immigrants do commit crime, not all do.

      I’m going to make an assumption here, and I hope you’ll follow it – beneath the apparent hatred is a concern that the wrongs of Islam are not reported/criticised. In that, I think you may be right. There’s plenty of criticism of Islam going on on the Internet, but it’s very rarely reported in the mainstream press. There does seem to be an effort to not ‘upset’ Muslims.

      Whether that’s due to Political Correctness or not I don’t know. The strong reaction to anything anti-Islam must have something to do with it, and I’d agree that it’s completely wrong (in certain situations.). If I say or do something that Muslims (or any other religion for that matter) find offensive, then frankly they should keep their noses out. If, on the other hand, I say or do something with the intention of causing offence then I can understand it.

      I’d argue with the assertation that these people are cowards. The simple fact is that many people focusing on one spot is far more effective than widespread attack. You also need to keep in mind that there are specific arguments against each. As I’ve mentioned, currently, Islam has little effect on us here in the UK so it’s not surprising it hasn’t been as roundly criticised.

      I don’t care what religion people practise as long as they do no harm to others. Very, very few religions qualify for this across their history!


      December 29, 2010 at 11:45 pm

      • You plainly quoted something that was not said with regards the stoning etc. If you monitor things closley you will see many acts of child abuse, especially in the recent years have been commited by Asian immigrants. If you go to the Asian Countries where a lot of the hype comes from about whites doing the same you will find in fact that massive majority of those commiting these acts with child sex prostitutes, are indeed their own government and police/citizens etc.

        This fact is often covered up by the officials doing it but the hysteria and subsequent politics of this slight of hand is being milked by those NGO’s there making good off the back of it! Keep up the hysteria and false stats and get more money in, that is before we even start on the hidden political motives of a vast amount of NGO’s and “charaties”.

        Immigrants commit a massive amount of crime in the UK considering how many are here and that is only the reported crime. My simple argument..why import crime?

        Simple way to stop a lot of it is to stop any unskilled person from coming here, if they do not have skills we need they are not required, we have enough of our own languishing and need to get into with them.

        Islam has little effect, does it hell! go tell that to those who cannot go into areas they once lived in because of Asians and Muslims!

        Where I used to live in London when it was a nice area is now a craphole full of Muslims and such and all the age old ways and effects of England gone. I have seen it for myself! No amount of left wing rhetoric will change what I have seen for myself.

        Tell me this, do you think for one minute any Christian or White could go to there Countries and do exactly what they do here?

        So why the Hell should we have to put up with them here?


        December 30, 2010 at 12:08 am

  11. Wy do you perceive that being “Anti-gay” means I am religious? Everyone I know who does not like Gays is not religious. They just think sticking your dick in a mans arse is mentally corrupt and disgusting.

    If you want anti-Gay then Islam is your religion there my firned , a lot more so than Christianity!


    December 29, 2010 at 11:36 pm


    As you seem to like the paper so much, at least they report more o0n the truth abotu immigrant and etnic crime than others who simply cover it up!


    December 30, 2010 at 12:50 am

    • As I read your earlier arguments the first thing that came to mind was this is a ‘Mailesque rant. Hence why I mentioned it.

      I’d rather read a paper that takes a balanced view on things, so I don’t currently read the papers!!!

      Sorry to hear your old haunts have become a craphole, that truly does suck!

      I’m also not disagreeing that British Culture should be left ‘as is’ rather than adapted to suit the needs of other cultures. That doesn’t justify, however, racist rants.

      The simple fact of the matter is, there are some Muslims who are complete tw*ts, but there are also Christians, Atheists and Buddhists who are equally tw*ttish. Colour, race and religion have nothing to do with how pleasant a person is.

      As for the anti-gay stuff, some of what you’ve said reminds me of arguments I’ve heard from religious people. Hence the assumption. To be honest, I can’t see how it affects any straight guy as long as they’re not being actively pursued.

      As for calling it deviant and un-natural, other species also practise homosexuality (dolphins for one), so natural it definitely is. Counter-productive? Maybe but definitely not unnatural.

      Not sure I’d want to do it, but as long as no-one is trying to make me I’m happy enough to let others get on with it.


      December 30, 2010 at 7:38 pm

      • You are an endless source of common sense as far as I’m concerned – except for your name!!

        Hi FFAAnon 1 !! I think I shall call you Cecil from now on.

        Peter Reynolds

        December 30, 2010 at 7:45 pm

      • Hi Peter,

        I usually go by Bob but Cecil’s fine, both are pseudonyms in any case!

        Apologies if you think I’m troll baiting at all, but I’m genuinely curious about some of these view points!


        December 30, 2010 at 7:54 pm

  13. David, what the hell are you going on about man? As mentioned above, why is it wrong to point out and discuss issues relating to the RC church? I’m sure at some point we will discuss the wrongs of other religions be they Islamic or any other. We are however currently discussing the RC church. And what is this anti gay bull… Seriously mate your not coming across very well at all in fact, you rhetoric suggests an individual in their teens. Why not relax, enjoy the dialogue. You need to readjust your thinking. As far as the gay community is concerned why not let others live as they please as long as they are doing no harm?
    You appear to be straight.. so try thinking along these lines…. Gay men take good care of themselves are not burdened by macho bull and in general enjoy their lives to the full. Look deep and think that these men could be up against you when looking for women to be friends with… Judging from your immaturity I would suggest to you that this is a very good thing.. more women for REAL men like you??


    December 30, 2010 at 1:51 pm

  14. Nick, it is wrong because any idiot can see there is a singular assault on Christianity by the left, these same people do not have the balance, courage or where with all to challenge ALL religions so publicly, again they are cowards who do not have the courage of their convictions. There is a bigger issue going on behind these attacks, some of us see them.

    As for homosexuality I will repeat, they can do what they do I don;t care, just shut up, stop shoving it in peoples faces and do not expect tolerence when they do not tolerate those who do not agree with them. They are in the minority so stop acting as if they are the majority.

    Tolerance is a Two way street!

    FFanon, you constantly make assumptions based on your own prejudice and beleifs, stop thinking that because someone does not think like you they are religious, bigoted, racist or otherwise. You do exactly what you accuse others of, like my left thinkers..rank hypocrites.

    The left are always stupid enough to beleive that the more they shout and force their views the more they get, the more you will create those who will be happy to use violence to fight you.

    You have to understand there will always be those who do NOT want your views or way of life, you have to tolerate them or what is inevitable will be.


    December 30, 2010 at 9:02 pm

    • Actually David, it might surprise you to know that I do agree with some of what you are saying. It’s more the broad brush that I take issue with.

      As for my assumptions, they are largely borne out of experience and I make them knowing that they could be wrong. Its very hard to have any kind of debate without starting with at least a few assumptions. I never suggested that you were bigoted, and simply said that some of what you said was racist (In fairness I should have said MAY BE).

      Interesting how you keep talking about ‘the left’ given that you are posting to the blog of a known Tory! Not sure whether you’d consider me a lefty, but I wouldn’t say into any of the usual pigeonholes.

      I completely agree with your closing sentence, but based on previous posts the impression is that you don’t practise what you preach.

      Personally, I’d welcome a real debate on religion as a whole, but I can see why Catholicism has been specifically targeted in this case. Take schools for example, there are christian (and not necessarily catholics) teachers who refuse to teach evolution. Or insist that it be moved from science to RE, I had just such a teacher at school. To my knowledge, in the UK, there’s not currently a similar issue with Islam (of course, it may not have been reported.)

      Your last post kind of sums up exactly what I’ve been trying to argue. Anyone and everyone is free to believe (or in the case of homosexuals – practise) what they want. As long as they

      a) do no harm
      b) don’t try to foist it onto others

      In this country Christianity is particularly bad for option b, and historically has been terrible for a as well. Whilst Islam is equally guilty, it is on a lesser level at this time.

      But the generalisations are what need to be avoided. I know christians that just accept that I’m not interested, and I know chrisitans that would spend every minute ‘converting’ me if they could. I actually know very few muslims, but those I have met have usually been quite amiable and left me to being me.

      FWIW I’d actually be very interested to hear Mr Fry’s views on Islam and any other religion he cares to talk about. It’s possible, however, that he has the same issue as me – I could talk about Christianity and it’s issues all day, but I lack the indepth knowledge of Islam to do the same. I could generalise about both, but it would seem a failed argument.

      Why is this? The school I went to taught us all about Christianity and spent about 10 mins on Islam.

      On the other hand, you could be right. But as the guy’s an atheist I’d be surprised if he didn’t have some issues with Islam as well.

      Sorry, that was a bit rambly, wanted to reply before I cremated dinner!


      December 30, 2010 at 9:57 pm

      • Make no apologies for rambling FFanon, a good ramble can bring about many a interesting thought πŸ™‚ I apologise for my pitiful grammar and spelling but given I am ultra busy replying to several sites, threads, court cases and helping others far more than my ability allows for a single person it is an excuse …albeit a feeble one. Time time time…..hurry hurry!

        At least you are reasonable enough to converse with and I enjoy someone who has ability to tolerate my “onslaughts”. I do it for a reason, I can judge many things by a persons reaction.

        As for Peter’s “Tory” credentials I am extremely dubious of them. I see nothing in his various words across the Net that even resembles “traditional” Tory, quite the opposite. I would go as far to suggest it may be a front. Alas I could also be wrong too?

        As for Stephen Fry, I have spoken with him in person, albeit briefly and I have long been an admirer of the man. If he has views on Islam and as a practising homosexual I am sure he must, I would task him to make the same kind of public speech with the same Zeal as he does the RC church or explain why not?

        After all we know all mass religion is fundemantallly about control through fear, Dogma and manipulation…so why are these same people not attacking ALL religions the same way? That is my Major issue. It is the fact that only one is being attacked that makes me suspicious of the motives of those behind it.


        December 30, 2010 at 10:24 pm

      • There’s nothing wrong with an onslaught against someone interested in hearing it! I developed a thick skin long ago, so you’ll be pleased to know I’ve not even directed an expletive towards you yet!!!

        The only possible explanation I can give for SF not criticising Islam is the one I gave above – lack of in depth knowledge on the subject. Personally, I only know the basics of Islam so couldn’t raise much of an argument either for or against. Because Islam doesn’t get preached to us in the UK (yet) the way that Christianity does, I’d imagine many are in the same boat.

        If I felt I had the time, I’d be interested in learning more about Islam so that I could form a logical argument. Sadly, I don’t and I doubt that SF does either!

        Interesting thought for you about the RC church – have you noticed they’ve stopped talking about damnation etc? It’s still part of the teachings and yet they no longer mention it, result of a weakening audience perhaps?

        I’ve thought of another possible explanation, but I very much doubt it holds true: anything we do that is anti-Islam stirs up a lot of upset in the Middle East. When it’s a UK speaker, the whole country gets vitriol directed at it, at these events are often used by the likes of Al Qaeda (forgotten how to spell it!) to help recruit ‘martyrs’. Perhaps that may be an aspect of why we are seeing less public opposition than we might otherwise? Not that it’s an excuse.

        As I mentioned before, I perceive this more as an attack on a subject they are familiar with rather than deliberately isolating the RC church. It’s also got to be related to the recent evangilism we’ve seen on the part of the BBC (amongst others).

        Simple question: Do you think it’s fair we as tax payers should subsidise the Pope’s visit? There’s no harm in speaking out for or against it, and in this case Islam doesn’t factor in at all.

        In the bigger picture, there’s plenty of anti-Islam talk going on, albeit not from SF. I’d say it does need a public figure to give it more momentum though.

        The biggest problem with religion as a whole is we only ever hear about fundamentalists, whether it be a Muslim cleric, Westboro Baptist Church or those that want the whole Internet censored (did you know there’s a catholic ISP!)

        The whole situation is nothing more than a big mess, and perhaps temporary focus on one area is what’s needed to start sorting it all out?


        December 30, 2010 at 10:42 pm

      • Oh and Re: Peter’s Tory credentials, most of what he writes reads as Tory to me. Except, of course, that he is honest enough to criticise the Tories when they cock up.

        Some of it is quite subtle, but it’s definitely there!


        December 30, 2010 at 10:44 pm

  15. Nick, tell me when there has ever been a full on assaultive debate like that against Islam?

    Then explain why not in all these years?


    December 30, 2010 at 9:13 pm

    • Hi David, to be honest I can’t think of one although that said, I would be interested to participate in any intellectualish debate on the subject. I do understand you point of view. I for one think that Islam is as flawed as any religion however…. I would also say that a lot of what we perceive to be issue with this particular mob are in fact cultural issues rather than religious. eg women being second class etc.. nothing to do with their holy book and all to do with men holding onto power.
      Again, I do see your point but, i think, unlike you appear to, cannot level personal hatred toward a religion that is only being (as are all religions) hijacked by men doing wrong in the name of their god.I was also a little unsettled by your homophobic rant. I must admit too that the thought of sex with another man unpleasant however, who gives a f–k? let them get on with it. I certainly wouldn’t stop liking someone if i found them to be gay. After all what has it got to do with us i ask.


      December 30, 2010 at 10:55 pm

  16. FFanon, it is easy to attack that which is closest to you, the real adventurers and truth seekers go after something more foreign πŸ˜‰ I would love to challenge Stephen Fry to speak on Islam, not only from a homosexuals POV but from a religious, female, white chrsitian, pagan and historical POV. If he cannot talk on these things…he should not have started the argument! else expose his agenda?

    Do I think tax payers should pay for his (Holy hypocrits) visit? Well the Vatican is a state and as a head of state protocol dictates we must address him as such. If we are not to pay for him, then we must not pay for any “head of state” visit whether African, American, Isreal or Palestinian. This is fairness. That is the way I see it. Equality, same rule for all.

    Nick, again you miss the point and reverse the context, I have already said, what gays do unto themselves behind doors is their business (read my posts again) and I would extend them every courtesy and privacy. However I want to see a ban to gay pride marches as they encroach upon the beleifs and sensibilities of a majority. They must respect the fact that a majority do not want to see them parading down the street in buttless spandex and fluffy handcuffs with disturbed Hamsters nailed to them.

    If they truly wish to be equal and respected they must NOT do such things, as any intelligent person will accept, such things are a flagrant provacation to those who do not see it their way. They must accept some restraint on themselves if they wish to be accepted as all others.

    It always strikes me as funny, thos who proclaim


    December 31, 2010 at 1:41 am

  17. be the speakers of “equality and tolerance”. They are always the worst offenders of such and the greatest hypocrites.


    December 31, 2010 at 1:53 am

  18. Dear oh dear, your lack of tolerance astounds. So quick to label others with the hate coursing through your veins. You speak of others ‘equality and tolerance’ whilst being devoid of such qualities yourself.
    The shame of it is that some of your reasoning is sound but, this is lost behind your delivery so full of venom.
    Whilst clearly your are our intellectual superior (there seem to be so many like you out there)you have no idea of how to sell concepts and influence through reason. I would suggest you read up on basic sales and/or read ‘How to win friends and influence people’ then, people might be able to see through your red mist. Also… try to stop thinking about those gay man running around your mind..try thinking of pretty ladies or else I fear we will soon see you marching the streets of Brighton with a hamster nailed to you, to quote your own poetic terminology.


    December 31, 2010 at 9:53 am

    • See what I mean, so tolerant.


      December 31, 2010 at 5:48 pm

  19. Nzder who has lived in London for years about to go back to the land of the long white cloud>

    Guys keep up the good work to free the herb in the UK.

    Peter, keep strong as its only a matter of time before this government legalises cannabis. New Zealand also has no choice but to legalise>

    Herb is good for the soul and herb is the healing of the nation. Anyone who thinks the herb is a waste of time is only wasting time whilst on the herb>

    Jimmy Brokenshire go spark up a fatty of pure charas mr know it all! Come back tell me what to do I think not…

    Be wise when useing the herb and to all lovers of the herb Jah bless!!!

    Aoteroa stick budz

    December 31, 2010 at 3:20 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: