Abominable horse groom

Dan's Demo

There was a demo in Cardiff against one of my cousins. An evangelical Christian group demanded that Dan O’Neill be sacked.

I’m not sure if the Echo can sack Dan. He retired about ten years ago and is now pushing 80. At one time Dan and I both wrote columns for the Echo. We agreed on so many things, especially drugs, that it all got boring. They  had got to rid of  one of us. It was me.

It’s spooky but I recently had a clash on the same subject with Don Horrocks of the Evangelical Alliance. Don had previously charmingly compared gay marriage to ‘marrying a horse.’

Dan O’Neil simply asked the question, “If God considers gays an abomination, why did he create them?”

After my clash with Don Horrocks, a constituent rang me to say that perhaps he was not being entirely truthful in his answers. Our inquiry was into the perk of charitable status given to many extreme religious groups.  I found him evasive. Here’s the unedited transcript of the select committee.

30 Paul Flynn: Mr Don Horrocks, do you believe that homosexuals are evil?

Mr Horrocks: Why are you asking?

Q31 Paul Flynn: Because members of the Evangelical Alliance, I understand, preach against homosexuals.

Mr Horrocks: Could you explain why it is relevant to our present topic?

Q32 Paul Flynn: I will tell you why it is relevant. What we are looking at is whether society should give a subsidy to groups of people, a subsidy that not all of society has or all organisations have. You are in a privileged position, you are asking for this subsidy and having it continue, and I am asking you whether it should continue if you are doing something that is not in the public good. I am trying to establish the point that not all things that Christians do are benign or in the public benefit. Let me ask you again: do members of your Alliance or yourself believe that homosexuality is evil?

Mr Horrocks: We have supported publicly gay rights. We are on record as doing so. You can check that out. Not everybody who supports gay rights is actually acting in the public interest. Certainly not everyone who is religious is necessarily doing something in the public interest. All I can point to you is what publicly the Evangelical Alliance has made clear.

Q33 Paul Flynn: Do you believe that all Muslims are going to hell?

Mr Horrocks: Religious belief, by definition, believes in the tenets of its own religion. So Christianity would affirm the uniqueness of Christ.

Q34 Paul Flynn: That is not my question. Do you believe that all Muslims, possibly Roman Catholics as well, are going to hell?

Mr Horrocks: I think what I believe here is irrelevant to the more important question about whether or not religions can actually give space to each other with mutual respect and tolerance while holding to the uniqueness of their beliefs.

Q35 Paul Flynn: Could you try to answer the question?

Mr Horrocks: And I am trying to make it relevant to the discussion.

Q38 Paul Flynn: Do members of your Alliance believe that women are inferior and should be subordinate to their husbands?

Mr Horrocks: I have not met many of them if there are, but you are always going to get mavericks in any organisation.

Our Committee has come in for criticism, and sometimes praised, for our attack dog style of questioning. Re-reading this transcript, I believe that I was not sufficiently aggressive.

 If I had known that a kindred organisation was about to try to depose cousin Dan from his Echo perch, I would have taken off the kid gloves.

Never 'Mr Nice Guy' again.

Hysteria suspended

Is the national knife crime neurosis over ?

You remember it. Lots of scary stories prompted blood-chilling threats from politicians of all denominations. The police were planning to make knife crime a higher priority than terrorism. The nation quivered in fear. Parents fretted when their youngsters left their homes to buy a bag of chips . Rent-a-mouth MPs demanded stiffer penalties.

Now we have the truth. Knife crime is not 'multiplying at an alarming rate'. It’s going down, rapidly. The British Crime Survey  has been recording violent incidents involving knives for years. In 2007-08 the number of such incidents was just under 130,000 a year.

That is 25% down on last year, when the figure stood just shy of 173,000, and well under half the 1995 peak of 340,000.

The figures do not cover all young people but they do prove a very strong trend. All violent crime is abhorrent. But the ‘knife crime epidemic’ was largely a media invention.

So what will they scare us with next?

Myth making

Incredibly the media believe their own myths.

They forecast that Gordon Brown would go as PM if Labour lost in Glasgow East. Utter bunkum. Today’s papers extend the myth by inventing new plots among Labour MPs and Cabinet Ministers.  One MP has said Brown should go. Te rest is almost certainly invented.

A new Labour leader would have to seek approval in a General election. Only MPs can trigger a leadership contest. It’s not hard to work it out.

Exactly how many Labour MPs would like to have a General Election now that Labour is on 24% in the polls?

Comments

[Transsexual]

Evangelical Alliance are against transsexuals and all transgendered people too. Kind of a logical result of their ridiculous, and thoroughly nasty sexism and homophobia.

[Stewart Cowan]

Thank you for your comments Huw, but you are quite wrong and I don't know where you got these suppositions from.

I'm not blaming anyone else for what happened to me during those ten years. Where did you get the idea I was?

I could try and blame my genetics, but God's power gives us the strength to overcome and eventually this is what happened. All the glory for my recovery goes to the Almighty.

The issue with the ills of our country can be largely blamed on the Government and those who advise and control it. We elect them ostensibly to do what's best for us!

There is nothing paranoid about what I say - I back it up with sources - it seems that people are either too lazy or scared to think about it for themselves.

Some people I speak to say to me things like, "we know governments do bad things - like commit false flag terrorism - but there's nothing we can do about it."

What an attitude!

I have many flaws myself. I am not denying this either.

A major problem when discussing these issues is that many people, Christians included, are not at all familiar with scripture.

You previously wrote:

"Mote, Beam - work it out
also try to go and sin no more."

I've covered the first bit already. I am a sinner, which is the reason I need a Saviour to deal with my sin in order that I can be reconciled to God.

This does not mean ignoring sin in others. The scriptures make it clear that we are to warn our brothers and sisters of the consequences of sin. This is a recurring and important theme in scripture. Actually, its importance cannot be overemphasised.

The gospel is about salvation, which is not possible by continually and wilfully sinning and without sincere repentance and faith in Christ that leads to a change in behaviour.

As for "...go and sin no more," you didn't put the complete verses down:

"Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a WORSE THING come unto thee." John 5:14 (my emphasis)

Of the adulteress whom the people wanted to stone, the Lord said to them, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."

Nobody did and He said to the woman:

"Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."

The problem with many people engaged in a homosexual lifestyle is that, not only do they refuse to "sin no more" but they want to shout about: 'gay pride'.

And of course, pride cometh before destruction.

From Proverbs 16:

16 How much better is it to get wisdom than gold! and to get understanding rather to be chosen than silver!

17 The highway of the upright is to depart from evil: he that keepeth his way preserveth his soul.

18 Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

19 Better it is to be of an humble spirit with the lowly, than to divide the spoil with the proud.

20 He that handleth a matter wisely shall find good: and whoso trusteth in the LORD, happy is he.

[Huw O'Sullivan]

Your story of addiction, Stewart would almost certainly move us, but what you obviously do not understand is that it would not surprise us. You have switched from one addiction to another and that was clear from your very first post.
You have all the standard traits of an addict.
The one I find most obnoxious is the consistent (not just with you but with most addicts) need to place the blame for the ills of the world and for their own personal lives and experiences firmly in the hands of others.
I have yet to meet an addict who does not consistently disown responsibility for themselves whilst blaming everyone, from officialdom to work colleagues and family for their own failures. Obviously you, Stewart go a little further than most in having a level of delusion and paranoia that certainly is unhealthy.

You show this Stewart by being quite clear on what everyone else is doing wrong by not living and thinking the way you live and think. A true christian, one feels, would need to spend a lot more time, examining themselves and their own motivations and actions, working hard to fix their own flaws.

I suggest that you give it a try, the next time you wish to rail against something you currently consider immoral or wrong, stop and think instead is there something about myself that is less than perfect that I can work on.

[Stewart Cowan]

Amazing: Labour is now monitoring my sleep pattern.

Be afraid.

Why the insult about my brain capacity vs Rowan Williams. Do you know what his IQ is, because mine is pretty high?

Not that it matters really as his application of scripture is shaky.

>>>All parties supported the successful smoking ban<<<

I agree, it was successful. People feel more controlled and helpless than ever before.

Don't get me wrong; I am opposed to smoking. I know how damaging addiction is. If I related my story to you, it would make your toes curl and soul weep.

It is still no reason to ban a legal pursuit in places where everyone is happy with the smoking arrangement.

On one hand you insist that homosexual behaviour is normal and charities must subscribe to it and children must by conditioned to accept it BUT then you say smokers must be vilified and despised.

"All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others."

As I have already said:

"There is no equality - just a hierarchy of ideologies."

[paulflynn]

The comparison with Rowan Williams refers to your brain power. All parties supported the successful smoking ban. Blogging at 3.00 am. Time you had some sleep.

[Stewart Cowan]

Oh dear, was my comment too long? The start should read as follows.............

Mr Paul Flynn wrote regarding me: "I remain astonished that ideas that disgraced mediaeval times are still lurking in the minds of living people."

I don't support the drowning of suspected witches either, but I do insist that Christians are treated as human beings and not "gnats!"

I have just read the comments on your smoking ban page and your government doesn't treat smokers like adults either, free to make their own choices.

As in every other area of life, there is an infestation of officialdom.

I don't smoke, by the way, but I would rather breathe in bucketsful of other people's smoke than be dictated to and grassed up in this bizarre and highly unpleasant climate of control and surveillance.

It is the same attitude that forces Christian adoption charities to place children with homosexual couples or be shut down.

Now I understand why there was a perceived shortage of foster parents leading up to this - to suggest the need for homosexuals to get involved with children - this is why, I believe, potential parents (married heterosexual couples) were barred from adoption for such inexcusable reasons as they "go to church" and "have too many books."

"Rowan Williams is attacked ( a gnat biting a giant)"...............

[Stewart Cowan]

Mr Paul Flynn wrote regarding me: >>>"I remain astonished that ideas that disgraced mediaeval times are still lurking in the minds of living people.">>"Rowan Williams is attacked ( a gnat biting a giant)"<<<

And if enough gnats bite, the giant druid will easily fall and make way for someone like John Sentamu.

Why do you esteem Williams? Because he accepts anti-Christian political correctness without complaining too much, or if he does voice concern about Labour's increasing fallenness, it's in a nice hippy sort of way?

What is Labour's endgame?

It is shaping up like "1984" but much worse. The similarities are astounding, even in such detail as the national lottery to keep the proles preoccupied.

The future of the UK, Labour-style, is this:

A total police state/technocracy where nobody can do anything without being surveilled, monitored or reported to the 'authorities' for un-PC or un-EU/UN-like behaviour (for not conforming with the Beast?)

A land where four-year-olds are introduced to sex and drug 'education' in order to corrupt their childhood and turn them into dysfunctional adults, primed for a lifetime of probing and herding by 'authority'.

A place where cigarettes are sold in unmarked packets, kept behind the counter and then adults have to stand outside to smoke them, meanwhile, the dysfunctional 12-year-olds created by what passes as education and entertainment/celebrity-worship, are getting contraception and abortion 'advice' from the school's 'sexual health' clinic thanks to the government implementing the usual sort of "advice" from the likes of Brook whose existence depends on immoral behaviour.

Then there are the endless wars, just like in "1984". US politicians have said they'll be in Iraq for decades. Your fellow MP, Harry Cohen agrees. The 'war on terror' is a great way to control the masses.

Create an enemy who is unbeatable and use the everlasting "war" to control the population - and even have the gall to insist it is for our safety.

I could go on for hours on the subject of the impeding dystopia.

---------------------

"Keir Hardy is offered as our example. Keir was not a great thinker. There was always a strong humanist inspiration in the early Labour Party."

I bet you he was a very great thinker compared to today. You don't need to be a great thinker to know what is right and do it - you need guts, determination, spirit, honesty, humility, compassion, wisdom and a sense of natural justice.

What passes as 'intelligence' today is more likely to be the ability to remember facts and figures and spout them parrot-fashion.

This is totally different to the wisdom that is needed to rule a people in fairness and justice.

-------------------------------

"The transcripts are on the Public Administration Committee site."

Thank you; I'll take a peek.

[Stewart Cowan]

An old chestnut from Patrick: why do bad things happen?

Because in this short life, we are tested for our mettle. We are tried in the fire to purify us and remove the dross.

Only through very, very testing situations can a person's true worth be measured, don't you think?

Somebody - it might have been on Labour Home - had a go at me because God told Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac. "How could a loving God do such a thing?"

Despite having to wait until he was very old to have his sons, he was prepared to do God's will and not his own.

He proved his faithfulness by being prepared to put God first - and was rewarded with a scape goat to use as the sacrifice and kept his son as well.

We're not animals who act only on basic instincts, programmed by their DNA. We were created for a special purpose in the image of the Creator.

It's not hard to work out. Of all the millions of species, how many have sent their own kind into space? Or have the organisational abilities to put on an animal olympics and beam the pictures to their fellows around the globe?

How many wonder about their salvation?

A lot of people in the West are spoiled by having things too cushy - they eat too much, drink too much, buy things without thinking that they don't even need, etc.

It doesn't help them progress to be better folk, does it? It makes them slovenly, selfish, thoughtless and their lives are actually worse than people who have far fewer comforts.

Did you read a few months back about the delegation that came over from one of the south Pacific islands? They have an extremely basic lifestyle by our standards and after a few days in London and other cities, couldn't wait to get back home.

They noticed how unhappy people were as they frantically went about their business.

Thank you for being the first to try and address the Keir Hardie conundrum.

Unfortunately, it makes no sense. It was his faith that made him what he was - if he had been, as you say, born in 1980 and did not find his faith, then he wouldn't have been a great politician, because, like he said himself and I have already posted:

"The impetus which drove me first of all into the Labour movement and the inspiration which carried me on in it, has been derived more from the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth than all other sources combined."

That's because proper Christian faith is a power for good. If you refuse to believe this, the problem lies in you, not the teachings of Christ.

You can blame primarily selfish people, not the Almighty, for the starvation and general poverty in the world.

As Mr Flynn rightly says under "Carry-on starving," the whole market is rigged to make money for those who already have plenty.

Christ told us not to be selfish and greedy. He said if you have two coats and someone asks for one, give it too him.

The main problem is that people these days don't do what the Lord said and do do what he warned against.

This is a recipe for disaster and we are starting to see a real decay in the fabric of society - like has not been seen since pre-Christian Britain - in fact some people are becoming more barbaric than then.

"We have moved on Stewart!"

Only in terms of the passing of time. We have moved in other ways, but not 'on' - and look at the state we're in as a result.

[Paul Flynn]

Thanks for the comments. I remain astonished that ideas that disgraced mediaeval times are still lurking in the minds of living people.

Rowan Williams is attacked ( a gnat biting a giant) and Keir Hardy is offered as our example. Keir was not a great thinker. There was always a strong humanist inspiration in the early Labour Party.

The transcripts are on the Public Administration Committee site.

[Patrick]

"It's a good idea to have the Creator on your side, don't you think?"

The hypothesis that a creator is looking out for you Stewart but meantime allows worldwide disasters, earthquakes, September 11th's, Iraq and Afghan wars , and at present Millions of people in Africa starving is not only amusing but suggests you suffer severe delusions of grandeur.

on the Keir Hardy one.
In the 19th and early 20th Century Christianity was as popular as it is unpopular now.Had Keir Hardy been born in say 1980 i've no doubt he would still be a good politician , but a christian , that's another story.
God fearing people used to think that the Earth was at the centre of the universe, the World flat, slavery was acceptable, Animals were put on Earth just for man's consumption and barbarity, and you could beat your Wife as long as the stick was only so big.
We have moved on Stewart!

[Stewart Cowan]

Huw O'Sullivan - so you think it's fine that you have been conditioned by a homosexual agenda via the media. You accept this as fair.

And what else have you been conditioned to accept? Like the article says: abortion and divorce.

What else? Do you even know? Do I even know? The media is very powerful indeed. Peer pressure is very powerful indeed - again, the article talks about vilifying 'anti-gays' and most people want a quiet life and find excuses to lay down and submit.

It is wanton denial on your part and, I presume, the abandonment of your own sense of worth that allows you to be a willing participant in a grand mind-control experiment.

You need to think this through properly.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Exactly, but the Lord and the prophets were always warning people of the consequences of sin.

Can you see the difference?

I know it's sometimes hard to see the difference between self-righteousness and genuine concern for sinners.

Let's just say that I was a major sinner in the past and suffered mightily for it. I am still a sinner, of course, but where a sin is clearly identified, I try and avoid it, not deny that it is a sin.

One far mightier than me will judge the deeds of all the people of the earth, whether they be good or bad.

It's a good idea to have the Creator on your side, don't you think?

God's laws are the laws of His Universe. If we break them, we pay the price. I think most people accept, for example that what goes round comes round, which is why the Saviour said to do good unto others, even our enemies. It's why we must treat our neighbours as ourselves. It's more beneficial for us than them.

Such a law cannot be possible in Dawkins' worldview because, as he says of the world, there is "no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference."

You don't believe that, do you?

And I know the world sees me as insane. You're not the first to say it and won't be the last. It was prophesied that the true faith would be widely ridiculed in the last days.

I would probably have cause to worry if the masses started agreeing with me. I wish they would obviously for their own salvation-sake.

What you are actually telling me is that I am insane to have the same beliefs and principles as Keir Hardie and many other early Labour leaders...the point that everyone is ignoring.

[Huw O'Sullivan]

No Stewart you are still confused.
What I am saying is if there is such a thing as sin, which if it existed in a christian sense would be someone breaking a law of God,
then the Gospels spell out exactly what followers of Christ should do about it.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Religion, if it is worth anything is useful for the individual, to provide them with a philosophy to live by.
If on the other hand you think it is to provide rules for everyone else to live by then you're doing it wrong.

Your discovery of a gay agenda, in as far as it seems they dislike being victimised and want all the same rights that you consider to be yours alone, is hardly threatening or undermining except to those who have built structures for themselves with insecure foundations.

You are probably finding in your life Stewart that you are often completely bemused by how many people are too stubborn to admit it, even after you've explained it to them.
Without wishing to hurt your feelings I am fairly sure you will already have found many people who not only don't agree with you but many who question your sanity.

This should give you pause for thought and perhaps some self examination.
When you are pure and perfect then come back and explain some more.

[Stewart Cowan]

Huw O'Sullivan - are you saying there is no such thing as 'sin'?

Even when I offer clear evidence of a homosexual agenda, you still don't believe it or if you do, refuse to say, as it blows your argument to bits.

Here's what stage we are at now in the agenda - courtesy of "THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA"...

"Make the victimizers look bad. At a later stage of the media campaign for gay rights -- long after other gay ads have become commonplace -- it will be time to get tough with remaining opponents. To be blunt, they must be vilified."

"First, we week (sic) to replace the mainstream’s self-righteous pride about its homophobia with shame and guilt."

"Second, we intend to make the anti-gays look so nasty that average Americans will want to dissociate themselves from such types."

As Edmonds would say, "you've been gotcha'd!"

Why are you too stubborn to admit it, even after it's explained to you?

And still nobody has answered my question about the hate-filled, right-wing extremist, Keir Hardie.

[Huw O'Sullivan]

No Stewart it is you who is confused.
At least that is the best light that could be put on it.

You for example, do not choose to have homosexual relations for the very simple reason that you are either not homosexual, or given your attitude, you are homosexual but have been raised with such an abhorrence of it that you can only attack it, driven by self loathing.
You are presumably however heterosexual and therefore only if laws were passed to prevent you from having sexual relations with adult females for your entire life or to punish you severely if you broke the law, could you even begin to understand how such legislation is an attack on people's being even if your persecutors used such lickspittle excuses that doing and being were separate.
Or perhaps they might be liberal anti heterosexuals and allow you to have your nasty little heterosexual relations as long as you keep any hint of your proclivities hidden and certainly shouldn't expect the law to ever recognise your permanent relationship with your chosen partner.

However you do not live in such a place and you can have sexual relations with women.
You can walk hand in hand with them.
You can share a romantic meal with them.
You can marry and be recognised as having committed to one and hopefully just one.
And yet you object to, for reasons that are clearly beyond sanity, homosexuals having any of the same rights you have.

The changes in legislation have not diminished your rights one bit, except perhaps what you believe to be your right to make life unpleasant for others and you are surprised that people identify that attitude with the religion you seem to be implying you are part of.

Mote, Beam - work it out
also try to go and sin no more.

[Stewart Cowan]

Huw O'Sullivan, you make the error of confusing 'being' like a person's colour and 'doing' as in their behaviour or religious activities.

Suggest you read "THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA" to see how homosexuality is actually being forced down our throats:

http://www.abidingtruth.com/_docs/resources/8142838.pdf

P.S. Political Correctness is a curse on this country.

People are far ruder today - work it out.

Nobody seems to want to answer this question - if Labour's Christian founders were alive today, you would think of them as hate-filled right-wing extremists, wouldn't you?

See how it is actually YOU who is wrong about all this?

[Huw O'Sullivan]

While the commentator here clearly has personal issues there are parts that are common to many of a conservative bent.

Paticularly the delusion that by making changes to laws to remove institutional injustices against people purely because of their sexual orientation is somehow forcing homosexuality down their throats.

People who wish to generate ill will of any kind towards others simply for who they are, whether they are black or muslim or gay, or for that matter all 3 or many other things that have been singled out by different groups including religions throughout the millenia should never, ever get public funding to do so.
Why should any one of these target groups pay, as they are all taxpayers, to support an organisation that attacks them.

The UK has freedom of religion for all.
Trouble is some people feel their freedoms are lessened when others are allowed their own freedoms.

These same people need to understand that while it is very easy to attack other people for their perceived flaws, there is one thing that is pretty much guaranteed, it is even biblical, your own flaws will be greater and deserve more of your attention.

PS
Political Correctness is all about not being unthinkingly rude or obnoxious and not using demeaning or pejorative language and or descriptions about others.
It is not now and never has been a bad thing.

[Stewart Cowan]

Patrick: "I don't write to belittle or mock any religion or faith but the fact is that the world would be a much better and less hostile place without them."

I refer you to my reply to John.

You cannot group all religions together and make such a blanket statement. It is dishonest.

Why can't you bring yourself to admit that Dawkins cannot be right because he clearly and totally contradicts himself?

Case closed. Dawkins can't save you or be trusted to describe reality because he is clearly confused.

The Labour Party would never have been any good for the people of Britain had it been founded on the 'principles' of atheism.

It would have been like the Soviet system.

You, Patrick, trying to enlighten me, is like a blind man trying to help someone with perfect vision cross a motorway.

[Patrick]

Stewart,having read what you have to say it seems the perfect time for you to act not preach.
I doubt that you will as the Stewart Cowan party would be about as popular in the 21st century as a virus.
This talk about "demons and devils", come on.Be careful, talk like that could frighten
children or people of unsound minds.
By the way i'm a British hetrosexual but find your views as ancient as the dead sea scrolls.

[Stewart Cowan]

John, the devil has played a part in most religions, so it's not surprising they get a bad press and rightly so.

Look at how confused Rowan Williams is.

See how what you might call 'proper' Christianity made Keir Hardie a better person and a fighter for other people's rights.

He fought unceasingly for causes that reflected his strongly held values - including voting rights for women, an end to colonial rule in India and racial equality in South Africa.

Not the right for people to sin. The 'right' to have homosexual liaisons or the 'right' to kill a child in the womb.

You can see that it's not just religions that are run by demons these days, but mainstream political parties too.

I'm not saying any of them are worth voting for because they have all been corrupted by political correctness.

It's a shame how most people seem to have been taken in by the incremental loss of principles in Westminster and beyond so they will accept, albeit grudgingly, almost anything.

[John]

Stewart I see that you mention the so called decades of conditioning by liberal media yet fail to mention the millenia of conditioning by religions.
I agree with you that Paul should show the same zeal in exposing the hypocricies of all religions and not just those of christianity.

"the devil was walking down the street with one of his acolytes in front of him a human was picking up a bright shining object that brought wonder and awe to his face. The devils acolyte asked him "what has he found" the devil replied "he has found the truth and the secret to human liberation on this earth" the acolyte looked at the devil "but aren't you worried that you will be exposed and no longer have a place in human affairs" "of course not" replied the devil "I'm going to help him organise it"

[Stewart Cowan]

I did try searching on Google using one of your phrases and only your site appeared.

I will try and find the whole transcript when I have the time, unless you can post a link.

"ending the barbaric persecution of homosexuals"??

In Britain? Barbaric? In Iran: yes. Not here. You're clutching at straws.

I feel that people who use the words 'rant' and 'homophobic' to avoid answering questions have already lost the argument!

What were you doing to Mr Horrocks if not ranting via your questions, which were cloaked threats and insults.

It's as if you were saying to him, "how dare you believe that.....explain yourself, you evil little sod."

You didn't say how you thought Keir Hardy would respond to you.

You would probably think of him as a right-wing extremist for refusing to approve of sodomy and enlightening your minds with scripture.

Just to see how far Labour has changed from its Christian roots:

"Although raised an atheist, Keir Hardie was converted to Christianity, and became a lay preacher at the Evangelical Union Church. Christianity was to become an important influence on his political career."

"Keir Hardie was energised by an evangelical faith and values that stirred his passion for political life. Throughout he saw his faith and politics as one: ‘the impetus which drove me first of all into the Labour movement and the inspiration which carried me on in it, has been derived more from the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth than all other sources combined’ he once said."

"Keir Hardie steered the Labour movement away from what he regarded as the damaging influence of Marxism, and towards a moderate, low church and trade unionist version of socialism that was practical, flexible and helped create a socialist party that, with time, has been more electorally and politically successful than most socialist parties outside Scandinavia."

Now you are throwing your founders' legacy to the dogs and becoming unelectable, all to satisfy your crazed notions of 'equality' and making everyone do exactly as you tell them.

There is no equality - just a hierarchy of ideologies.

[paulflynn]

The full text of the Select Committee choice of witnesses and questions are in he public domain. It's been a searching inquiry in which we did our job of asking the hard questions where necessary.

The point of my original article is to question whether the Evangelical Alliance "defended gay rights". If they have, I suggest you contact them with your homophobic rants. If it is not true, then Mr Horrocks was not telling the whole truth.

It's not about promoting any activity, it's about ending the barbaric persecution of homosexuals of the past and the present in countries that share your prejudices.

[Stewart Cowan]

Thank you for your reply, Mr Flynn, but you miss the point.

Why should any religion be compelled to support New Labour's pet project of promoting homosexuality?

Why?

Why has it been brought to the forefront like some false god that has to be bowed down to?

Why do you see it as imperative that around 2.5% of the population holds the other 97.5% to ransom?

I would suggest that throughout the world, very few people believe homosexual acts are OK, which would explain for the illegality in almost every country.

Thanks to decades of conditioning in the West by liberal media and 'education', many more people believe that certain acts, once almost universally regarded as totally vulgar, are now so good that their children should learn about the behaviour in primary school.

Anyway, for centuries, churches have provided services where none other were available, whether education, health, overseas ministries and so on.

You had a representative from our Jewish friends. Was the committee equally disrespectful of his religion?

Did you badger him into answering the following questions:

Do you believe that all Muslims are going to Hell?

Do you believe that women are subordinate to their husbands?

Do members of your religion or yourself believe that homosexual acts are evil?

Did you ask these questions to the Jewish representative or just Mr Horrocks?

You had no Muslims before your Select Committee?

Why was this?

Did you just instinctively expect their charities would be "all-inclusive" by supporting Jews, Christians, atheists and 'Gay Pride'?

It is strange if you did, because as you know, some of their so-called preachers are calling Muslims to destroy our country and according to the Tax Payers' Alliance are costing the country millions of pounds to have certain of them here.

Why no Muslim representative?

Were you all afraid to ask him questions about his views on other religions, women and homosexuality?

Scared as being portrayed as Islamophobic, despite pushing through the religious hate legislation because they wanted it and Labour saw votes in it?

(I don't think it should be people like Mr Horrocks in the dock!)

Are you suggesting that Tony Blair is a Freemason?

No. (Do you know differently?)

There is a problem there with his new status as a Catholic?

Too many to mention! Well, I just say what incredible hypocrisy both on the part of the ex PM and the Church of Rome.

In ten years, Blair ruled while two million abortions were performed; two immoral, unnecessary and costly wars were begun; homosexuals were allowed to practically marry; the Christian religion was hammered from all sides of his regime.

Now we're supposed to believe he is a good religious man helping to bring peace and understanding to the Middle East.

How gullible are people?

Here's a hypothetical question for you, Mr Flynn.

Suppose you could go back in time and interview the evangelical Christian, Keir Hardy.

Would you treat him the same way as you spoke to Mr Horrocks?

I can imagine how a man born in Lanarkshire in the mid 19th C who worked in the coal mines from the age of eleven and became a Christian would respond.

You would be quaking in your boots and begging for forgiveness.

[Patrick]

"Patrick, Dawkins has a big problem: his assertions can easily be debunked by his own words!"

Stewart, i believe that religous peoples have an even bigger problem. The reality of a Godless world causes such fear as to cling on to perpetuated myths and fantasies.
For Millennia our ancestors lived in trees, eat fruit and nuts and never built a church. The leader of the gang was the fittest, biggest, and strongest. He was quite a ruthless nasty piece of work (bit like the old testement God). So mighty was his rule that he indeed held a Godly status.

years later amidst changing climate conditions Man's decendents left the safety of the trees for the ground.
Early man needed to hunt. Hunting needed co-operation. The God of the treetop had no place here. The new leader had to be a diplomat. Protection in exchange for hunting co-operation.Male and Female partner bonds
evolved. A Man making a mistake would be an isolated man. An isolated man could not hunt.
The leader of the group needed respect and pack strength. By diluting to mere captain created a huge vacuum.
Who can be God now?
As we all know there is no shortage of candidates for this position.
I don't write to belittle or mock any religion or faith but the fact is that the world would be a much better and less hostile place without them.

[John]

I think you are right Stewart all religions should have there hypocrisy and intolerance challengened. All this pussy footing around Islam is certainly doing non of us any good. The intolerance of Homosexuals,women and differant religions to their own is not exclusive to christianity.

[Paul Flynn]

You are entirely mistaken.

We had representatives of the Church of England and the Jewish Religion before our Select Committee. We asked them all searching questions on why they should have a subsidy from taxpayers in the form of charitable status.

We have asked hard question of private schools and private health services. The evidence and answers that I query are those from the Evangelical Alliance - the least credible witnesses. It's odd way to promote homosexual rights by comparing gay marriages to marrying a horse.

Are you suggesting that Tony Blair is a Freemason? There is a problem there with his new status as a Catholic.

[Stewart Cowan]

Correction: in the third last paragraph of my reply to Mr Flynn, it should of course read:

"zero respect"

[Stewart Cowan]

Patrick, Dawkins has a big problem: his assertions can easily be debunked by his own words!

OK, so he said all this, but on what grounds?

He wrote in "River out of Eden":

"In a universe of blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference."

He has, by his own admission, no possible way of determining what is right and wrong.

If we are just apes got lucky, descended from primordial soup, where can morality come from and why should it matter if, as Dawkins says, our DNA is in control and wants to replicate?

Fortunately, our laws are based on a Judeo-Christian system, although it is becoming increasingly battered out of shape by politicians with ideas of their own.

Without natural justice, there can be no justice. Evolutionists cannot give us fair laws because if they do 'feel' something is right, they can't say why.

Moral relativism is a major reason we are having such problems now with bad behaviour.

So, take anything Dawkins and his ilk say with a bucket-load of salt.

[Stewart Cowan]

Mr. Flynn, thank you for your reply and apologies about the 'disgust' statement - mine is a corporate disgust for the upper echelons of the Party in general - not the honest foot soldiers who cannot see how much Labour has changed from the aims of its Christian-based foundations, although I would have thought that you should know better.

Now your reply is quite unfortunate. You found my MySpace page which I haven't used for months, but anyway, about this idea of hatred and its prominence in today's society.

You accused me of having a "hate-filled website" by stating that Bush and Kerry are both members of Skull and Bones.

How can it be 'hatred' to state the FACT that the last US election was between two candidates, both part of the same Luciferian fraternity that only admits 15 new members a year.

I think that's pretty important when you consider the secrecy of these organisations and the often shady world of high level politics, most of which you are probably unaware.

Doing the work of the Devil?

Bush, the winning "Bonesman," told whopping lies and worse in order to start these bloody wars for geopolitical and financial reasons. What side do you think he's on in the spiritual war?

Have you read "Profiting from Iraq's occupation" by your colleague, Harry Cohen?

Is David Cameron a Luciferian?

I doubt it. Why mention it? I'm not a Tory. What he is, is dazed and confused by political correctness and doesn't want to be too conservative because he would seem out of touch with the present moral vacuum.

Maybe you should have asked if Tony Blair is Luciferian. He channels 'light' (Lucifer?), does funny things at pyramids, has weird rituals/superstitions and now works at trying to destroy true religion in the name of peace.

Are there any good British politicians?

Good in what way? Honest: yes, some. Decent: yes, some. Hardworking: yes, many.

But like you, Mr Flynn, far too many have been deceived, like Adam and Eve, but by the serpent of political correctness.

You think it's a great laugh to poke fun at a Christian and try and get him to admit that he is this or that based on your own lack of knowledge of scripture.

Have you given any Muslims the same treatment?

Have you goaded any about their submission to Allah being the only way of salvation?

Have you suggested they hate women and homosexuals and quoted from the Koran?

What about the orthodox Jews in your constituency? You could have a great time with them, quoting from Leviticus alone.

But no, it's not PC, is it? You don't want to be labelled as anti-Semitic, but showing zero disrespect to a Christian is right up Labour's street.

People are slowly waking up to all your 'hatred' propaganda. Like I said, you all stir up the melting pot, deliberately created, then wrongly and shamefully suggest we all hate each other merely by voicing our views, then clamp down on free speech and make people climb further into their pigeon holes so that you have the masses where you want them - fighting with each other for 'rights' in a totally UNEQUAL society.

I don't hate anyone. My religion forbids it anyway. You politicians are the ones who hate and have engineered a society of fear and suspicion.

[John]

I think one of the most disintegrating factors in our society is the tabloid press. They seem to revel in fermenting hate and fear and most of what they print is downright invention.
The biggest problem is that most of our citizens do believe most of what they read, this is dangerous. It means that Politicians are under pressure to make policy based on false premises in order to placate the fear engendered by the media in their constituents.
Most of this fear has been made up and is usually based on moral hysteria not unlike that of evangelical religions.
Take the spate of reefer madness reporting in the tabloids we now have an increase in cocaine use and a drop in Cannabis use because our citizens view cocaine as a "safer" alternative to cannabis.THis is in direct contradiction to the report of the ACMD and Prof Nutts Lancet report into relative drug harm. Such truths rarely make the headlines our Tabloid editors preferrring to make "stuff" up rather than print something truthful.
I am reminded about a saying that a Computer programmer friend of mines says "rubbish going in means rubbish coming out"
It is a sad reflection on our society

[Patrick]

The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
Richard Dawkins 'The God Delusion'

What do you think Stewart?

[paulflynn]

I did not recognise your name Stewart Cowan but I have found your hate-filled website. It includes this;

'The elite knows that Christ is real - but they follow the Antichrist. Think of the implications of that!! They are members of Freemasonry and other secret societies. They participate in occult ceremonies at Bohemian Grove in California. The last U.S. election was between George W. Bush and John Kerry – both members of Skull and Bones – a Luciferian cult based at Yale University that admits just fifteen members per year. They really do have an organised control grid."

We can set your wild views on the Labour Party alongside your opinion on mainstream American politicians-who you believe are doing the work of he devil. Is David Cameron a Luciferian? Are there any good British politicians?

[Stewart Cowan]

Why does Labour have such a rabid hatred of Christianity, when the Party was founded on such principles?

Why does Labour always shove 'alternative lifestyles' in our face and say if we don't like it it (falsely) means we are full of hatred and so certain opinions must be legislated against?

Labour helped create the huge melting pot we now have and loves stirring it up, because while we are fighting each other for our 'rights' the government walks over ALL of us.

You frankly disgust me in your inability to properly serve the people of Britain and foster goodness and principles among her people.

[paulflynn]

Interesting prejudice on the Welsh language from Dan. We were both brought up in Grangetown during the war and went to the same schools. He lived in the posh part of Pentre Gardens. I was in Penarth Road.

On almost all other subjects except the Welsh language, I agree with Dan. I'll try to convert him if I see him at the Eisteddfod.

[Ian]

Dan's column is always one I turn to in the Echo and his comments about homophobia were welcomed by many.
However, his recent diatribe in the Echo on the growth of the Welsh language was purile nonsence, playing on ignorance and nothing else. He appears to be reacting to his beloved Cardiff changing from the days of his youth, yet Cardiff has never stood still and who would want it to? As a Grangetown resident who he claims to be representing, I am embarrassed that Dan is so out of touch on this issue and I hope that he makes the effort to attend the Eisteddfod next month.
Mind you, I suspect that he would turn up with blinkers firmly fixed, be greeted by the first 99 people he sees and report on the 100th who ignores him.