That bundle of right wing prejudices Ann Widdicome has resurfaced with another example of why Christians get a bad name.
This time she has put down an amendment which states that expressing criticism of homosexual conduct should not be classified as stirring up homosexual hatred.
Ms. Widdicome is a right wing Tory and a devout Christian, so devout in fact that she swapped from C.of E. to R.C. over the issue of women priests, surely the longest running case of sexual discrimination ever.
She want's to give bigotry am exemption when it involves gays, when it's them you can say what you want, a lovely woman.
This is the same woman who, when in the Home Office under that other caring chap Michael Howard thought it proper to have young women prisoners who were pregnant chained to the bed while in Labour, it's difficult to write that, stand back and consider what was going on, and further consider that she thought it OK.
You have to consider just what kind of a person this is, sometimes words are not enough to describe people who are capable of such actions. She complains that the Govt. did not provide enough time to debate this and advises people to remember at the next election that the Govt, was denying free speech.
I hope that at the next election that people will remember that people like Ann Widdicome are still in the Tory Party and vote accordingly.
Unfortunately and embarrassingly the amendment was seconded by Jim Dobbin Labour and a handfull of Labour MP's supported it, if this was my MP I would work to have him/her deselected. We in the Labour Party are opposed to bigotry and prejudice it is not our job to promote it, these Labour MP's should be ashamed, I hope their CLP's follow my advice.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
58 comments:
'We in the Labour Party are opposed to bigotry and prejudice.'
Dear God, you couldn't make it up!
Presumably bigotry and prejudice are acceptable when it's Kelly targetting Jews, Americans (white), the SNP, Tories, Mormons and in a recent post, Freemasons.
Odd that, here you are critisising Christians who want to critisise gays. I believe there's a word for people like that :-D
"expressing criticism of homosexual conduct"
Just so I'm clear (I get very confused very quickly at my age) if a gang of homosexuals make a regular use of the toilets at my local sports field for the purposes of 'cottaging', I must not be critical. Have I got that right?
Councillor,
The problem with the proposed legislation is that it so broad-based, and it creates an entirely subjective definition of "incitement to hatred". You might not like to acknowledge this, but a great many people view homosexuality as a sin, but believe that the answer is love, support and therapy. That viewpoint is a world away from the view that gays are evil and headed for Hell, etc. How is that distinction made and who makes it?
Many of the MPs who voted against this legislation will not automatically share the "homophobic" views you despise so much - they may just regard it as a threat to freedom of speech when society bans people from expressing views that the majority do not share, even where they personally find those views distasteful. Where does it end?
What is needed is legislation to prevent incitement to violence. That is clearly a breech of freedom of speach and should be treated as such.
Your simplistic analysis of the issue of women Priests is ludicrous - shut up about issues you know nothing about. As far as Ms Widdecombe's Catholicism is concerned - I don't know the woman, but I think the decision to become a Catholic, with everything that that entails, must have involved something more complex than simply the issue of the Priesthood.
If their CLPs don't follow the advice, will you remind voters that people like Dobbin are still in the Labour Party, and vote accordingly?
Why have you never condemned David Blunkett's homophobia? He is a member of your party yet you don't object to the homophobia in your own ranks. Why is that?
Tell us why this is acceptable;
'My own experience is that there is no evidence that section 28 has had a negative effect on teachers' ability to deal with bullying. No head teacher has raised it with me in all the school visits I have made.' -David Blunkett
'homosexuality is a pretended family relationship' -David Blunkett
'More importantly still, has the likelihood of this access to children being used by covert paedophiles been fully thought through?' - David Blunkett on the repeal of Section 28
Does the above reflect your own views or will you give an unequivocal denunciation of Blunkett's poison?
Oh and no I'm not a Tory, I'm not SNP, I'm not Lib Dem, I'm not SSP/Solidarity, I'm not green. There is no party political agenda here. I'm the B out of LGBT sick of your hijacking of our issues for your own petty ends.
I see Peter Hain regrets his failure to disclose donations. Can you tell me if the department he was head of would have let away some poor soul on Income Support away with that? Naah thought not!
Labour = Class Traitors
Hain, Harman, Alexander, Manser, Williams. Oh Terry the company you keep.
'Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.'
I'll bet even Mad Anne knows what LGBT means.
£950 buys a lot of......
Perhaps like all women, Anne Widdicombe is just thick.
"pregnant chained to the bed while in Labour"
The capitalisation suggests that Widdecome wanted members of a political party chained to a bed while in prison.
Could this not be re-written as a protection on the freedom of expression? You only give a couple of lines to that idea yet as an MP she has every right. Widdecome is right on one thing though, the Labour Party do not (in general) give enough time to allow opposition amendments to its bills. And the result has been 10 years of very poorly drafted legislation because oversight has not been enforced.
I think that anyone is allowed to express themselves in anyway that they see fit. But that goes for everyone. And those who say that one person's viewpoint is more worthy than another (as this bill is saying) is merely re-enforcing discrimination.
I support gay pride marches just as much as I support Widdecome's right to speak against homosexuality. Both offend each other but I give thanks that I live in a country where we have not (yet) enshrined the right not to be offended. Sometimes George Galloway speaking at Respect meetings says some very nasty things that are offensive but not illegal but I do not call for his speech to be banned (just for him to be in prison for his many crimes).
Sometimes your posts offend me but I don't call for you to be banned because I have no right not to be offended.
Your suggestion that Labour MPs who supported this motion be deselected clearly underlines the idea you hold dear that freedom of speech is only to be defended when it agrees with your narrow worldview. Which is quite bigoted of you.
on the other hand.
No amount of legislation by this dishonest government is going to make me like Queers!
Why can't they show some discretion and stay quiet about their disgusting, unhealthy and unnatural affectations.
Talking about discretion, when is wendy going to resign,she ,along with Harriet Harridan are as guilty as Hain.
(David Duff) 24/01/08 - No, you haven’t got it right and you display prejudice with your example.
The behaviour you describe would be unlawful when done by anyone, why pick out homosexuals ?
Because only homosexuals cottage. Heterosexuals go dogging and that is usually in car parks.
(Anonymous) 24/01/08 - The legislation protects gays and treats them equally that’s all.
“You might not like to acknowledge this, but a great many people view homosexuality as a sin”
I do acknowledge this and regard those people as bigots.
“when society bans people from expressing views that the majority do not share”
Where did you get that from, making up statements like that is telling lies.
Wiiddicome’s conversation ? Go and check it for yourself , it was over the women priests issue, you should shut up about issue you know nothing about.
(Anonymous) 24/01/08 - The legislation protects gays and treats them equally that’s all.
“You might not like to acknowledge this, but a great many people view homosexuality as a sin”
I do acknowledge this and regard those people as bigots.
“when society bans people from expressing views that the majority do not share”
Where did you get that from, making up statements like that is telling lies.
Wiiddicome’s conversation ? Go and check it for yourself , it was over the women priests issue, you should shut up about issue you know nothing about.
I'm not religious but I cannot criticise anyone else for taking a stand on the basis of their religious views.
Terry, you accuse Ms. Widdecombe of bigotry because she proposed an amendment. Presumably you also imply that Jim Dobbin and the other Labour MPs who voted for the amendment are homophobic bigots too?
In my opinion, it was just fortunate for you that it was Ms. Widdecombe who proposed the amendment as she is "safe" for criticism in that she is not only a Christian but the most evil and bigoted of all people, a Tory. Somewhow I doubt you would criticise a muslim who made a similar statment with the same fervour for fear of appearing Islamophobic.
Your final comment about your stance against bigotry and prejudice might be a bit less hypocritical if you had not posted a mere 3 days ago, a glowing piece on the late Bobby Fischer. Whilst being an undoubtedly great chess player, Fischer was also a notrious anti-semite and Holocaust denier - a fact you chose to admit.
"I do acknowledge this and regard those people as bigots. "
Do you believe that they should have their opinions oppressed and denied their freedom of speech then?
(Will) 24/01/08
“will you remind voters that people like Dobbin are still in the Labour Party, and vote accordingly“ ?
Do I take it from this that you will be condemning Salmond (the spiv), Fergus Ewing, Roseanna Cunningham, Souter and of course Brian Adam MSP who trades students between the Anti gay Brigham Young University and your party.
I have stated publicly that people like Dobbin should not be in the Labour Party and I hope that they are deselected, over to you.
Would you advocate voting against any MP not deselected for this then? You did not answer Will's question before.
He asked what you would advise the people faced with the prospect of voting for someone who was against gay hate speech legislation. Would you advise people not to vote Labour in that situation?
(Angela) 24/01/08 -
I have denounced David Blunkett’s views before and I do so again, people with these repugnant views, IMO should not be in the Labour Party.
I didn’t highjack your issues they high jacked me, I simply feel that the LGBT community is treated very badly and I hate bigotry and prejudice.
“for your own petty ends” I have been advised before to shut up about these matters by some in my own side who seem to think that my views are likely to cost us votes so, what are those ‘petty ends’ ?
(James) 24/01/08 -
I can’t see the link here but I do think that our Social Security system has a far bigger problem with people who do not get what they are entitled to.
If we spent as much time and energy sorting that as we do chasing those who abuse the system for very little reward we would be heading in the right direction.
(Jane Abott) 25/01/08 -
I don’t regard gloating over other people’s troubles as a healthy thing to do.
When the news of Mike Watson’s sentence was made public spontaneous applause broke out among the delegates at the SNP conference, very disturbing, I don’t think that could have happened with any other party except perhaps the BNP.
Anyway the scripture seems entirely appropriate for you and, ‘she knows ye know’
(Anonymous) 09:34 -
There is a difference between being offended and being discriminated against, making it OK to treat the LGBT community this way is discrimination.
I am entitled to call for the de selection of any Labour MP. That is not an attack on free speech they can answer back and defend themselves.
If I called for the de selection of Labour MP’s who support Trident would that be an attack on free speech ?
That’s a rather ‘narrow world view’ you have.
(old and angry) 13:31 - As an example of how democratic I am, I’m going to publish this pathetic outburst of poison.
(Anonymous) 15:46 - Exactly, both are illegal so why are you singling out homosexuals ? It seems like bigotry to me.
(Tory Student) 15:59 -
“Presumably you also imply that Jim Dobbin and the other Labour MPs who voted for the amendment are homophobic bigots too“ ?
I regard voting with this amendment as an act of prejudice and bigotry, by anyone.
“the most evil and bigoted of all people, a Tory” That’s just silly.
Islam, Muslim, Mormon, Catholic, Protestant, Jew, Scientologist and ’uncle Tom Cobley an all’ A bigot is a bigot.
“Fischer was also a notrious anti-semite and Holocaust denier - a fact you chose to admit”
I didn’t choose to, ‘omit’ (I think you meant) his anti semitism, if anti semites were all like him there wouldn’t be such a problem. The poor man was deranged.
(Anonymous) 16:02
“Do you believe that they should have their opinions oppressed and denied their freedom of speech then“ ?
I don’t believe that freedom of speech should allow you spout prejudice, bigotry and hatred.
(Anonymous) 16:20 -
No and neither would Will we both have our crosses.
There are people in the Labour Party who don’t share my views and I will argue against them and vote against them but I can’t foresee a situation where I would advocate voting against the Party.
Perhaps if Salmond (the spiv) was to become a Labour candidate I would seriously consider it.
Terry, you've ducked the question again. I'm not the one saying "Don't vote Tory because Ann Widdecombe's a bigot", you are. If Dobbin's CLP don't deselect him, will you have the consistency to say, "Don't vote Labour, because Jim Dobbin's a bigot"?
Or will you sweep this under the rug?
(Will) 17:45 -
"Don't vote Labour, because Jim Dobbin's a bigot"?
I’ve answered this somewhere else.
No I wouldn’t do that because these people are not bigger than the party and no single issue is bigger than the party either.
I have spoken out on this many times and I do not spare people in my own party, you on the other hand don’t seem to have found your voice.
When are you likely to stand up straight.
Salmond (the spiv) and the Cardinal ? Big butch Fergus ? Come on Will when ?
Terry, all I'm doing is asking a simple question: why can you not see the double standards inherent in telling people that they should not vote for a party that has Widdecombe in it, because she's a bigot, but that you'll stay in a party that continues to indulge Jim Dobbin who supports her?
Why don't you show backbone instead of hiding behind your hatred for people who have the temerity to support a different political party?
You talk the talk, but you just admitted that come polling day, you would fall back into line and see homophobic bigot Dobbin re-elected. Why not walk the walk?
I'm not the one throwing labels around, I'm not the one telling people not to vote for Party X because of Y. I'm not the one saying that X can be any party but Labour. I'm not the one saying that supporters of gay rights should always vote for my party because we'll always protect them and let's just forget about those bigots who shatter that image for a few moments. That's you, and no matter how much you might bluster, or throw a temper tantrum when you're called on it, you can't escape that.
You are, quite frankly, an abuser, a hijacker of the gay community, and you would quite happily step over every one of our corpses if it got Labour back into power.
At least, with the bigots, we know where we stand. They're opposing us, and we can see them. You claim to stand behind us, but frankly, you'd be better off where we could keep an eye on you, you slithering hypocrite.
"I don’t believe that freedom of speech should allow you spout prejudice, bigotry and hatred."
Then start practising what you preach.
(Will) 25/01/08 - I believe the Tory Party to be inherently racist, and bigoted, that doesn’t mean every member. The Labour Party is not, neither is the SNP but, they have behaved very badly on this issue in the past couple of years.
The difference is that slithering cowards like you are afraid to get off your knees and fight them.
Must you go on so long ? who are you trying to convince ?
(Serpico) 08:13 - I already do, you should try it.
"I already do, you should try it."
I don't like spouting bigotry prejudice and hatred.
I have seen from your blog just how bigoted (sexist jokes), prejudiced (against Americans and Israelis)you are and your hatred (for white South Africans). Plenty of preaching there Councillor.
"Must you go on so long ? who are you trying to convince ?"
Will, don't post such long comments. The Councillor has the attention span of a midge and can only deal with non sequiturs and sound bites.
So you advocate voting against the Tory party because of Widdecome's stance on homosexuality (granted you will have other reasons but this post deals exclusively in this reason) but you don't advocate voting against the Labour Party for the same reason.
A while ago you attacked a lot of people you considered "nationalistic" in the sense of them adopting "my country - right or wrong". Do you now recognise that you have adopted an attitude of "my party - right or wrong" and that this makes you a hypocrite?
(Serpico) 08:20 - I’m not bigoted or prejudiced against anyone nor do I hate anyone, not even you.
(Serpico) 08:22 - See, far too long !
(Anonymous) 11:17 I’ve explained this. I believe that the Tory Party is inherently racist and bigoted, the Party, not all Tories, the labour party is not.
But the fact that you claim "the party" is bigoted is in itself bigoted therefor if you are bigoted and you are in the Labour Party by your logic the Labour Party is bigoted.
It does not matter if you are trying to justify it as "not all members". The fact you think the "party" is bigoted is saying that those joining the party give up their opinions and following with the masses - free will being abandoned. You apply a single trait to a disparate heterogeneous collection of individuals to satisfy your own prejudices.
By your own logic you are bigoted towards the Tories, some of your MP's are bigoted towards gays, some perpetrate racist attacks outside Labour Social Clubs and some are positively xenophobic about Europe so that must mean that the Labour Party is bigoted and racist.
All this and you would still forgive these sins and ask people to vote for you because of what you say rather than what you do?
It simply goes to show that the only party that really does "hate" and hypocrisy well is the Labour Party.
(Anonymous) 10:04 -
An overlong collection of tortured, convoluted bias and prejudice.
An overlong collection of tortured, convoluted bias and prejudice.
You should use that on your blog profile.
"An overlong collection of tortured, convoluted bias and prejudice."...could be a better tag line for your blog but you fail to address my points that your behavior in this manner makes you bigoted and by your logic makes the Labour Party bigoted (but still worthy of a vote).
All this from someone who did not vote Labour at the last election as well. And that last bit is the hypocrisy.
When are you likely to stand up straight.
Must confess I laughed at that one...
Big Butch Fergus
Are you trying to get Will all titillated?
'I don’t believe that freedom of speech should allow you spout prejudice, bigotry and hatred.'
Many Christians would say the same about some of the comments made about them on a variety of forums. Take the Guardian's 'Comment is Free' as a starter.
However, most of them don't seem to 'believe that'.. (others).. 'should have their opinions oppressed and'.. (be).. 'denied their freedom of speech'
Anyway, you have the wrong end of the stick. There is already existing law that perfectly adequately covers incitement to violence as regards issues of sexual orientation.
This proposed legislation actually opens the way for people to further conflate offense and offence. It is said that it won't, but we have already seen examples of police involvement under the existing legislation, where complainants have thought that someone else's legitimate actions, queries or opinions were offences, should they have been personally offended by whatever those were.
If you look hard enough, you will even find Peter Tatchell saying this proposal is unnecessary, so maybe Anne W is not as mad as she seems. In fact, if that is the case, then maybe the only sane person left in Labour is Dobbin, not to forget whoever else was brave enough to put their heads above the parapet
As to what all the others say on the magnamimous and genteel nature of your comments, what they said.
(Scunnered, O'Aberdein) 15:05 - I regard their amendment as an attempt to further persecute the gay community. Sorry you spent so much time on this.
Terry, Gordon Brown's government refuses to exclude Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a hate preacher who wants gay people to be executed, from coming to the UK. What does that do for your argument, that Labour won't block the entry of a hate cleric who wants gay people dead?
I'm part of Out for Independence, the LGBT wing of the SNP, campaigning for equality. Aside from demanding that all gay people in Scotland jettison any notion of independent thought and slavishly vote Labour time and again, what are you doing for equality?
You wait a year to answer my request for a comment on Jonah Ditton and hide from anything that shows you up for the two-faced hypocrite we know you to be. If you want to see what cowardice looks like, I suggest you look in a mirror.
'I regard their amendment as an attempt to further persecute the gay community'
As prejudice is making a decision before becoming aware of the relevant facts of a case or event, I'm sure you do.
(Will) 30/01/08 -
This Govt. deals with some very strange and sometimes nasty people and I don’t like it, I’ve spoken out about before.
If Scotland is ever independent, no matter under which party they will do the same
“Aside from demanding that all gay people in Scotland jettison any notion of independent thought and slavishly vote Labour time and again, what are you doing for equality“ ?
I think you have been to this level before have you not ?
I’ll let people read your last para. For themselves.
You keep fighting Will, the SNP reactionaries must be trembling.
(Scunnered, O'Aberdein) 30/01/08 - I know the facts, I see you are still on the side of justice.
Terry, time and again you judge political parties for the company they keep, and you attack others for supporting other parties for the company they keep.
You claim to not like the company the Labour Government keeps.
You didn't answer my last question. By the way, I have asked that one before, and I'll keep asking it until you answer it. But you won't because everyone knows that the true answer is that you've never lifted a finger for the gay community in your life except to type rants about people you don't like on your keyboard. So unless you have an alternative answer, let's just take that one as read and move on to this question:
If the company a political party keeps is a mark of whether or not people should support that party, and if you do not like the people Labour associate with, why are you still in the Labour Party?
Now, you can answer that one, or I can answer it for you. It's up to you.
(Will) 31/01/08 -
We have been over this ad nauseam but I’ve been thinking.
I asked myself why has this guy reappeared ?
Why does he write these tortuous long comments ? Always include abuse ?
I think it’s because I have shone a light on you and you don’t like what people can see.
We don’t have to keep going over it, you have prominent people in your party who have betrayed you and the gay community for money and votes, and you lack the bottle to take them on that’s what this is really about.
More hypocrisy, Terry. If you were the Big Man, the Hard Man, the Man with Right on His Side, you'd be able to answer any of the points I've ever put to you - I helped you put your point of view across to Iain Macwhirter (which was the right thing to do). However, whenever I've asked sensible, reasonable questions, all I've ever had back from you are partisan tirades, including, and I quote:
"you and your party are a squalid nuisance"
"get off your knees"
"Will, you ought to do the decent thing and let 'your' community progress without the embarrassment of you in their corner."
"Will - you are a bitter man"
"I don't even read the Daily Record, I'm not surprised that you do though."
You're such a big butch tough guy, Terry, throwing it about, but going all weedy when it's thrown back. You want to talk about backbone? Answer the questions. You want to complain about abuse? Don't dish it out. You don't want to be accused of being a lying two-faced hypocrite? Stop being a lying two-faced hypocrite.
Will said: Terry, time and again you judge political parties for the company they keep, and you attack others for supporting other parties for the company they keep.
Will, the esteemed councillor also defends to the death his own party for the company *they* keep.
He even believes the "Wendy has done nothing wrong" mantra. It tells you all you need to know about this champion of gay rights.
'We in the Labour Party are opposed to bigotry and prejudice.'
Aye right except when it's anti-protestant discrimination at Glasgow City Council. All the better to score freebies to Parkhead. If you weren't on the way out you lot would enrage me. The name and reputation of socialism is sullied by you money grabbing bigots. Long may you rot.
(P. Donnell) 10/02/08
As I’ve said many times, Scotland has a problem with sectarianism and racism. Thank you for confirming this so eloquently.
Post a Comment