Stick health warnings on gays, says Stock Exchange chaplain The chaplain to the London Stock Exchange may be forced to walk the plank after demanding that gay chaps be tattooed with cig-packet-style health warnings highlighting the evils of boy-on-boy. The Rev Peter Mullen, 66, declared on his blog: "It is time that religious believers began to recommend ... discouragements of …
We could tatoo priest with the warning relgion can seriously alter your world view or some such. It does make me laugh the some priest go on. Get with the times. Its no wonder that church attendances are declining when priest come out with views like this.
Paris becuase I want to know what she has tatooed on her arse :)
If what he's against is the "militant preaching of homosexuality", then why not try and satirise that instead of just being generally insulting? Of course, what I have against him is his militant preaching of Christianity, but that's another matter...... ;-)
Ah the old "it was only a joke" excuse again. How many people have tried that one and failed I wonder. I know a certain Mr Ratner failed rather famously.
I also wonder how he would respond to the argument that homosexuality is something you are born with, and as such it is therefore an act of God?
You know it would seem the guy is right, far too many people are too eager to be offended these days and if you don't put Joke, sarcasm or satire at the start of your post, article or blog entry then it's like 'light the blue touch paper and run for cover'
Oh and El Reg isn't immune to this, why do you think they have this Joke Alert icon?
it's the reaction you get for a negative one. "Straight and Proud" would get complained about, as would "Aetheistic and loving it".
It was clearly an attempt at satire, or alternatively he's stuck in the closet and just wanted an excuse to see a lot of naked gay guy's asses with a [tattooing needle] prick hovering over them, depositing fluid.
And "Fellatio Kills"? Doesn't that sort of apply to non-gays as well? Or have me and the missus suc[k]cessfully nabbed a fetish of them?
And for the obligatory awful punchline to the comment- the gay guys should learn to take it on the chin and the chaplain should stop trying to be a pain in the arse...
..that the supposedly religion does? Show tolerance for other's beliefs, respect for other people and spreading love? Of course providing you're not a senile old bigot with some kind of right wing tendencies, then that might just work. Couldn't agree more with AC1, tattoo the sad old git with "Religious abuse seriously screws you up! See attached for details!".
It's at times like this that I turn to the gospels according to Lord Hicks of William, a truly enlightened saviour taken before his time.
I do hate to be picky, but I think you'll find tattooing 'FELLATIO KILLS' on the chin is a bit pointless as that's not where the person carrying out the act is looking, and it's obscured by something else for the person it's being carried out on.
And if he's getting preachy with the stockbrokers, they should probably start painting 'COCAINE KILLS' on the cisterns of the toilets.
Pirates, cos we've all seen what seafaring men get upto, thanks to Portsmouth museums.
My worry about this article is, who is classified as GAY?
I am a transexual woman, (hence the anonymity)
Some in the church would class me as gay as I like men, The fact that i am female with a genetic abnormality meaning i appear male should not get in the way. I am straight and am interested in Men. but some in the church and in the general public would class me as gay.
Where is the tolerance from the church that Jesus preached?
BUT.
Yes, this is inflammatory if taken the wrong way and I think it's a load of crap.
However, I think political correctness has gone too far in this country if someone is derided for exercising their right to free speech. If he had posted anonymously this would never have made the news.
Pathetic. You're giving this guy the exposure he wants.
Yes, clearly he was deadly serious at the time and had already inked up his needles in preparation.
As for being born gay i'm not sure any serious scientific work has ever claimed more than that there are biological factors that influence sexual orientation, not that there aren't environmental factors as well. In any case worrying about the causes of sexuality misses the point- even if it could be shown some people have a genetic predisposition to be obese, no one would sensibly argue that it's therefore a healthy lifestyle choice. The rightness or wrongness or acceptability of an activity should surely be based on the the effects of the bahaviour, not why the person desires to do it in the first place.
Are you suggesting that the Bish should try some fudge-packing himself before he condemns it?
Hmm interesting legal and moral idea, I wonder where else that could be used.
Also I wonder what he would have tattooed on his behind? 'trial period only', 'breaking in - please take care' or maybe 'next .. Hymn 69'?
Not that I am in favour of religion or homosexuality, but at least I keep my thoughts to myself.
oh bugger ....
ttfn
Erm, then you're almost certainly doing it wrong, I think. Anyhow, if it was that dangerous, there would be HSE videos about it, with the participants donning the appropriate protective gear. Make a change from Z list celebs lifting boxes.
What a dick. I can't vouch for his blog, because it's gone, which is a shame, and an affront to freedom of speech to boot, but I have read his Times article, and if it _is_ satire, it's the kind of satire that actually does need a label on it, because it doesn't come off like satire in the way that I understand it.
And why should it, since these are indeed the teachings of that vile tract of ignorance and filth The Bible, although curiously, I don't recall most of this repressive shit being in the teachings of your actual messiah, upon which the whole disgusting cult is supposedly based, go figure.
So good on him, I say, for reminding us what vile, ignorant, intolerant and backward dogma is taught by the church he represents, and why we continue to choose to live in a secular state.
Perhaps he'd consider tattooing "SATIRE" prominently on his face, just so we all know for sure where he stands.
"I certainly have nothing against homosexuals. Many of my dear friends have been and are of that persuasion. What I have got against them is the militant preaching of homosexuality."
Whether he meant it as a joke, or was being serious, he should be sacked for the comment. PC is extreme these days true, but the point is, it would be like the leader of Germany joking in a blog about how he thinks Jew's are ruining the country and should be forced to wear a mark of some description to let people know who they are. It would be stupid, ignorant, and extremely wrong.
PS: gay's don't go knocking on peoples houses in the morning trying to spread their good news, so I'm not quite sure what their militant preaching is mean't to be - it's not like they can help being gay, they are born that way, it's not like religion. Ignorant twat-dangler worshipper.
I've always wondered which part of the bible actually says being Gay is evil. I haven't really read the bible in detail but I don't ever remember seeing anything portraying Gays as evil.
Was this just a case of someone in the Vatican wants it to be, or is it buried in the disclaimer at the back.
Eh? Why oh why do these right wing loons claim to be traditionalists? Stupid sods can't get their heads round a broad church understanding (traditional since Liz I) and are trying to turn the church into what they wish was the traditional stoning of anyone they don't like.
Pass the communion wine soemone, I need a drink to take my mind off of this shite.
Great work by the rev, many of whom's best friends are homosexual. It's good to be reminded every now and then that the pious totalitarianism suffered for centuries under the church really wasn't much different from the fascist orthodoxy offered by the Nazi party. Perhaps he should have used pink triangles and stars of David to make his point more forcibly. Hallelujah to a Church built on hatred, bigotry and persecution.
>gay's don't go knocking on peoples houses in the morning trying to spread their good news
Heh. I'd give them a few moments on the doorstep.
"Hi, we're here to tell you the good news about gayness - have you ever thought about your sexuality? We have some naughty little booklets here we think you'd find inspirationa... oh but honey, that is one fierce bathrobe, wherever did you get it?"
Anyway, it's a frickin' good point.
After reading this, I spoke to a friend of mine who's gay, to get his opinion. He found it hilarious. His comments (after he finished chuckling) was (paraphrased, he goes on a bit):
"This is why there are more practicing homosexuals in the UK than practicing Christians."
<SATIRE ALERT>
At this point I sent him to the local tattooist for his arse-warning (that's an "N", people!!!) appointment, after giving him a good beating for being an affront to God.
</SATIRE ALERT>
As a few people have said, religion needs a health warning. Apart from the CoFSM, of course, which is true.
So, nothing about rampant heterosexuality spreading nasty diseases around?
Nothing about promoting rampant sexuality with booze and car adverts?
Nothing about promoting males rather than females in the City, nor the blatant sexism that is pretty much company policy with some of the financial houses?
Fr Dougal MacQuire was right "It's all bollocks, isn't it"
And as people are being locked up these days for voicing opinion...
Whether homosexuality is a choice or hereditary, so what. It is a persons right to express their sexuality in anyway they wish. Of course if this expression involves the buggering of young boys, whilst most of us would find this repugnant and despicable, it appears more than acceptable within the church. Yet buggering a consenting adult isn't. Very peculiar.
This man is seriously deluded to the point of requiring psychiatric help. I should have sympathy for his plight but somehow I don't.
The Bible bashers usually point to the sheer eviltude of being a friend of Dorothy being in that laugh-a-minute bit of scripture Leviticus 18:22 'You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such thing is an abomination.'
Being the only book anyone should ever need, the Book then goes on to provide a handy pull-out-and-keep list of punishments worthy of David Blunkett; namely death.
Rational people point out the same punishment is ordered for sinners who eat prawn crackers.
Leviticus got the contempt it deserves here:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=rHaVUjjH3EI
...the bible specifically says somewhere that "Man should not lie with Man". Mind you, the bible says a lot of things, and the church is happy to pick and choose the literal parts at will.
Agreed that it's clear this chap was simply trying to be funny, but it's still not cricket. I hate the way the church is simply allowed to say "ah, but we can say what we want, it's in this book we have, see?" as if that's a get out of jail card for being an offensive bigot.
And for the Daily Mail readers, please stop banging on about political correctness being "out of control". Firstly, it's not. Really. It's just that people now realise that actually, it's not on to just be able to discriminate against or bully people because of their choice of sexual orientation. Secondly because this hasn't got anything to do with "political correctness". It's got more to do with the fact that a religion whose major tenets are tolerance and forgiveness shouldn't be doing anything to suggest that gays will go to hell or should carry health warnings.
The Anglican Church : Successfully Being Regressive Since 1534.
The guy is insensitive but his one point about militant (whether gay or christian) preaching I agree with.
The gay community spend too much time in my view self harming themselves by turning themselves into victims and marching around demanding the right to do whatever in public. I am all for equal rights and there should never be discrimination against people because they are gay. However human nature abounds and if I were to organise a straight and proud march and take a large crowd into Manchester's gay village waving placards that they found offensive, I am sure trouble would ensue eventually. But this is what they do and then act all surprised and victimised when people like the reverend thoughtless-and-unfunny over there.
Now you can't and shouldn't have to live your life under some kind of curtain to prevent others being offended by it but if you have half a brain you don't go out of your way to provoke trouble either.
As repugnant as the national front are, it would not be in the best interests of immigrants to march into one of their meetings.
At the end of the day, if issues of one person or another's sexuality are not rammed down people's throats (sorry!), most people don't care what other people do. It's only when you make a point of demanding something at someone else's expense that trouble starts.
The rev's bigoted and childish views (not shared by many) will soon be forgotten unless someone drags them into prime time news for an air his narrow minded views to a wider minority.
Mine's the one with "straight and proud but happy for you be however you want to be" on the back.
"The chaplain to the London Stock Exchange" - wtf?
"SODOMY CAN SERIOUSLY DAMAGE YOUR HEALTH and their chins with FELLATIO KILLS" - ffs! dont tell the mrs "FELLATIO KILLS"! i would also like to see the obituarys - 'death by gobble'.. or the headstone 'went with a smile on his face' :)
also isnt there some implied section of that bible comic thing where jesus is felated by mary? i know its probably not taught in sunday brainwashing school but i seem to think this came out over the mary magdelane stuff?
i do find it funny how many religious priests are anti-gay then we find out they are all fiddling with little boys... ahhh hipocracy in the church? who would have though it! :(
("far worse than the threat from international terrorism"); abortion ("200,000 embryos every year are ripped, untimely, from the womb..."); and, naturally, homosexuality ("what was once a mortal sin is now only a lifestyle choice"). - arent being gay & abortions a great way to keep population numbers down? you know, the big one, the fact we are reproducing exponentially? due to all the frikkin catholics and their 'everyone have 20 kids to outbreed any other faith' nonsense.
i wonder if im my lifetime if this evil shit that is religion will ever be gone? surely we are intelligent enough to not need a belief system any more?
"He's bang on about the abortions though :-(" - wtf? yes, lets have even more chav children cluttering up the welfare system...
the yanks are quiet today? i'm waiting to see if any of the bible belt come in to help the old bigot?
@" 'You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such thing is an abomination." - yup - ive never seen a man with a furry front bum! that would be an abomination eh? :)
This post has been deleted by its author
If Leviticus is to be believed you can't actually sleep with anyone (well, uncover their flesh - perhaps doing it with your clothes on doesn't could). And it says nothing about doing it standing up....
I wonder if the priests who've given their choir boys curtains will be willing to take the punishment put forth in Leviticus - the Daily Mail may have been right all along!
It is time to remove the "freedom of religion" from the books, so that hate-filled sacks of bile like this can be dealt with properly. The concepts of "freedom of belief" and "freedom of association" covers all the parts of religion that matter to sensible people, without giving the hate filled misogynist paedophiles the huge shield of "religion" to hide their crimes behind.
Because this IS a "hate crime". It is the deliberate incitement to violence against an identifiable group. If a person can be locked up with the key thrown away for advocating violence against Jews, or against "people of colour", or against any specific group, why are we still allowing people to advocate hate against homosexuals, other than the shield of "religion"?
Obligatory IT ref: "freedom of religion" needs to be replaced with "Freedom of operating system", and governments forced to specify freely available and non-patent encumbered data formats rather than specifying what OS and software their citizens must use to interact with said government.
I find it interesting that posters here generally think that the priest was out of order for his comments.
Some however, say that it’s a free world and he is entitled to his opinion.
It is interesting though that people quick to condemn a priest who says people of a homosexual inclination should be tattooed, they are not so quick to condemn muslim clerics who want to KILL them.
Sure the article was about a christen priest, but since his opinion is one of a religious leader, surly all religious leaders should be judged in the same manner?
To the folk saying he was entitled to free speech, remember that his position is one of influence, some people will listen to him and believe what he says because of that position.
And to the folk saying he should be excommunicated/sacked fine do so, but have the balls to ask for the same when even more extreme leaders of other faiths start inciting believers to hurt others?
What I love about this is the fact that now I could be considered racist or inciting hatred of religion in making this post. Which is why I post as AC. I wonder how other posters will treat this post? I’m I a person entitled to free speech, or a person inciting hatred of religions?
Oddly enough, I believe that people should be allowed to follow their own route through life, as long as it does not harm others. How many IQ points does it need to be nice to someone, smile, and say please and thank you?
I dislike the fact that people in religious power should be able to incite hate and then hide behind religion to say that they are being victimised when someone has the guts to stand up to them.
Here’s hoping I don’t get a Jihad on my straight arse!
Ha ha ha.
This kind of attack isn't worth a pinch of coon-shit and it's nothing to get stirred up over. Let the man make a fool of himself. Those who know the score realize that what really gets this dude's knickers in a twist is that down inside he wants to be a fudge-packer too.
If I belonged to a parish he was responsible for and had young male children, I'd be careful to keep him and them well-separated at all times lest his pent-up urge to be queer found outlet among the young and defenseless.
"To the folk saying he was entitled to free speech, remember that his position is one of influence, some people will listen to him and believe what he says because of that position."
also to the people saying this, remember you have no right to free speech in the UK, it's fairly relaxed, but definitely not free.
This appears to be the spin of the day - the markets failed because of moral reasons.
Well no, they failed because everything is grossly overvalued at the corporate level.
And they failed because the government did not support small business and threw all their eggs in one great big rickety corporate basket, highly irresponsible governing and highly immoral government.
Each nation needs a strong agricultural, production, and service sector, if you are found wanting in one of those you cannot make up for it by borrowing to the nines, because there will be a day of reckoning. If anything the butt fucking the market is getting at the moment is perhaps the most appropriate thing to happen.
People have been nannied into oblivion, and this is the result; a drop of 7% in the market in one day, this has nothing to do with the sexuality of any group it all has to do with over restrictive government at the individual level, and too laissez faire governance at the huge group level. Sodding communists.
It never ceases to amaze me how many people buy into the anti-Christian media hype about priests buggering little boys. What's interesting is that you don't see (for example) sports coaches being vilified to nearly the same extent; while one may often hear the sentiment "He's a priest, therefore he must be a kiddy-fiddler", we don't hear the sentiment "He's a sports coach, therefore he must be a kiddy fiddler" echoed nearly as often.
Yet consider this: To become a priest is a lifetime commitment; 7 years studying in a seminary, including social work, counselling and psychology degrees as well as religious doctrine, followed by years of mission work in hospitals, prisons, violent third-world nations and other unpleasant places to refine your commitment, before you can be ordained as a priest. That's why most priests are older men - it takes that long to become one. Contrast that with what it takes to become a sports coach: the ability to play sport, pass a mandated-notifier course and CRB check and you're in.
So which path is easier for a would-be paedophile to get up close and personal with the kiddies? I wonder what percentage of priests are paedophiles compared to the percentage of sports coaches? Yet you who so readily vilify priests rarely question the integrity of your child's sports club instructors. The fact is, most sports coaches, and most priests, are honest people with a genuine interest in their role.
Although not now a Christian myself, I was raised as one which included regular church attendances, my involvement with the church as a choirboy and altar boy, as well as participation in catechism and church youth groups. I also attended a Christian boy's school in my childhood as well, being taught by the Christian Brothers as well as the parish priests.
In all of that, I never once personally encountered any sign or evidence of sexual molestation, nor have any of the Christian friends of my family. Yes, it does happen - there's plenty of evidence for that. But it also happens in state schools, sports clubs, youth clubs and anywhere else children congregate. All of the brothers, deacons and priests I've known have been selfless, caring and intelligent men who work long hours for little reward other than their belief in their service to their God.
So to those who love ranting about priests and little boys: Are you a rapist or a kiddy-fiddler simply because you are male? Remember "all men are potential rapists"? Don't like being tarred with that brush just because a few men actually are? Neither do priests, most of whom are honest and decent people. So think before parroting the media's anti-Christian hype and furthering their agenda. Ask instead what mileage the power-brokers of this world stand to gain by disenfranchising religion!
... is that the potential drawbacks of "normal" sex are probably the worst of the bunch.
Sure, you can get AIDS from anal, you can also get AIDS from vaginal and, as a special bonus, you get to have an AIDS baby! Isn't it so special?
Stop trying to clean up sex, people. It's not meant to be clean.
If us poofters are to have caveats tattooed to us, it seems only fair that the clergy get some in return. How about "Danger, keep away from children" down their penises? Actually, thinking about it, I doubt they're well-endowed enough for such a long phrase. It'd have to be "Kids, no!" in 8 point text with -100 tracking.
@Dave Stark,
Yes and here it is for all to see: http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:8CVjPdAIrYQJ:petermullen.typepad.com/peter_mullen/+http://petermullen.typepad.com/peter_mullen/2008/06/gay-wedding-at.html&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=uk
P.S. //Joke-alert - The Rev must have had a bad experience with a pack of fags, hence his request for better guidance.......
Medieval attitudes? Check
Hatred of Homosexuals? Check
Muslim? No.
O.K. Carry on to a chorus of tutting then.
P.S. Great work as Chaplin of the Stock Exchange, a place well known for it's spirituality. The Bible would have had a different slant if Jesus had entered the temple and took care of the spiritual needs of the money lenders.
I don't mind when friends and even goofy aquaintances talk openly about their sex lives in front of me. I have been a bouncer for male and female strippers in my youth and happily cooperated when female friends insisted that I squeeze their new boobs. I have both gay and lesbian friends who for some reason feel it necessary to bring me to gay clubs because I blush a lot.
What i do have a problem with is public demonstrations of sexuality. Gay is fine, gay is even more or less normal in modern society, but gay is a sexual preference. If two men want to kiss each other and grab each others asses in public, cool. More power to them. But my experiences with gay rights parades have been aweful.
The gay community, instead of leading peaceful protests and parades demands that people accept public behaviour from them that wouldn't be accepted from anyone anywhere else. Their demonstrations seem to have nothing to do with their rights, but instead appear to be more of a circus where they use the blanket of the public deomstration to cross lines that in most circumstances are considered illegal and would even be considered over the line by hookers.
They yell at the spectators and insult them. They perform physical acts in front of children that minors shouldn't think about for years to come. They present their "protests for gay rights" as a "protest to let us do absolutely anything we want since we're gay".
if any gay rights parade organizers are reading this comment. Please show me that a gay rights parade and be about the real issue. Walk peaceful. Dress as you would any other day of the week. Carry signs, boards and banners that tell us what is important to you really. Place the focus on the issues, take it away from the lude behaviour. insist that only serious demonstrators join and cast out the members who insist on making a mockery of your cause. Gay rights is far too important to make a circus out of.
If you want people such as law makers and legislators to take your cause seriously, keep in mind that you should speak their language. They are typically insignifact little people who make themselves bigger by wearing suits and talking with large words they don't understand. They like to pretend like they're smart and important. If you want these pathetic souls to act on your behalf and change the laws to support your causes, you have to show them the respect they demand (deserved or more likely not). Attempt to appease them and they will be far more sympathetic.
Come to San Jose pride ,You don't See that, Come to Sana Cruz pride, Walnut Creek pride , Reno Pride, Tahoe pride . You wont see that there Oh by the way San Jose is the largest city . The majority prides aren't like what you think they are . San Jose really does not do drag queens . Last year there was only one drag queen that was outrageous. You see a group of Gays Lesbians protesting peacefully is not news there for San Jose pride does not get much news coverage. Now a guy thats dress like women with a beard seems to more interesting to the media . When I was at San Jose %99 of the people there were dressed like the do every day. Exceptions were the female impersonators(no they weren't outrageous and the trans folks that are not full time .
So if you have any other questions about how pride events are. Just ask me
Niya Toni Blake. Proud trans women
the guy is 66, i know plenty of people of this age that make jokes like this. he was trying to make a comparison between fag packets and men's bottoms on his personal blog. this was not an official church of england statement. ill-advised? yes. but see it for what it was - a bad joke.
The "straight pride" joke, while not being PC and so forth, did make me laugh and set me thinking....
How about "Jesus is Dead" t-shirts or;
"Satan's Army" buses in bright primary colours
Of course you can stick this warning on churches;
"Warning, minors enter this building at their own Risk"
"Priests may be harmful to children"
"Passive religion can harm those around you"
"Respect those around you, do not make them listen to your religion!"
and so on and on and on and...............
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
