Peter Tatchell is the kind of person I despise. In fact, even to look at him I see a bitter, twisted, warped weirdo and that is without subjecting myself to the drivel he comes out with.
It was on the Pope’s recent visit to the UK that I really encountered the level of his vitriol towards anyone other than his clan of sycophants. In truth, he is the epitome of stereotypical beardy-wierdy lefty that in previous years would simply be ignored but is now given minor airtime owing to the efforts of people of the ilk of Shami Chakrabarti.
His issue with the Pope, it seemed, lay in the fact that he refused to deem women fit to become priests and castigated homosexuals. I noticed on one of his protests that he was joined by a man wearing a frilly pink shirt waving a banner proclaiming “Jesus had two dads.” Perhaps the stupidest banner in the history of banner-creation…
Now, I am not a Catholic, nor am I am practicing Christian. I have my own philosophical viewpoint but I personally (having studied theology and having born witness to the ills of the world over these last few years) believe that Christianity is in its cultural sense, the natural base religion of the United Kingdom and by far the least harmful to the plight of others when it compared with the likes of Judaism and especially Islam. I have almost no opinion of the Pope as I do not regard him as my spiritual leader, but for Mr Tatchell to stick his crooked, bitter beak into the doctrines of the Catholic Church simply because it doesn’t quite meet his militant and quite biased views on homosexual rights is pretty hypercritical. I should point out at this juncture that this is not an attack upon homosexual people, the rights of whom I would never question – more an attack upon people with an in-built agenda that borders on the inane.
The reality is that there is a very clear reason as to why people of his ilk focus their energies on Catholicism, Christianity, Right-wingism and such like. It is because they are inherently anti-establishment, owing to the bitterness of their formative years. Mr Tatchell has evidentially felt an outsider for so many years (he has a history of opposing Thatcher’s government and having to be reprimanded for extremism by none other than Michael Foot – a man with almost communist views himself which tells you something!), which means that the vast majority of his viewpoints are formed simply with the premise of standing against those he views as “part of the establishment.” That is to say Christians, right-wing politicians, the vast majority of English citizens, the military, the US, blah, blah, blah
If he is so concerned about the practices of Christianity, then where is he to be seen protesting against forced circumcision on Jewish males and Muslim females, or the oppression of women by Muslims? What about other evils of Islam, such as Halal meat, Sharia law, and the burka? He’s not interested in them simply because Islam is seen as the antithesis of the west, which makes it ok by him. As Churchill said of Stalin, "If Hitler invaded Hell, I would at least make a favourable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons." Moreover, there is an element of cowardice in the blind eye he turns towards other religions when their retribution is often more potent than that of the Pope or the Archibishop. Criticise a Christian and you might make them sad. Criticise a Muslim and they’ll threaten to cut your head off.
The point about these people is that they are no better than the fundamental Islamists who threaten to burn and bomb the west every time someone makes a joke about Allah. Both Tatchell and Bin Laden share the same preoccupation with being “offended” by everything the west does. If you don’t like the fact that the Pope doesn’t like homosexuals, then don’t become a Catholic. I’m not homophobic but I don’t care if certain religions are opposed to gay people because it makes no difference to my viewpoint – so long as they don’t harm others let them believe in whatever they choose to. I cant control people’s viewpoints – there are people who stand in the street draped in crucifixes claiming that Jesus told them they would rise from the dead and conquer Mars but I don’t stop them and tell them they’re mental as it’s a waste of time. When the Pastor in the US stated that he was going to burn the Koran, why should Muslims care? Offensive? I think someone burning a book is slightly less harmful than a bunch of nutcases flying planes into skyscrapers and killing over three thousand people. Whatever happened to sticks and stones?
It was on the Pope’s recent visit to the UK that I really encountered the level of his vitriol towards anyone other than his clan of sycophants. In truth, he is the epitome of stereotypical beardy-wierdy lefty that in previous years would simply be ignored but is now given minor airtime owing to the efforts of people of the ilk of Shami Chakrabarti.
His issue with the Pope, it seemed, lay in the fact that he refused to deem women fit to become priests and castigated homosexuals. I noticed on one of his protests that he was joined by a man wearing a frilly pink shirt waving a banner proclaiming “Jesus had two dads.” Perhaps the stupidest banner in the history of banner-creation…
Now, I am not a Catholic, nor am I am practicing Christian. I have my own philosophical viewpoint but I personally (having studied theology and having born witness to the ills of the world over these last few years) believe that Christianity is in its cultural sense, the natural base religion of the United Kingdom and by far the least harmful to the plight of others when it compared with the likes of Judaism and especially Islam. I have almost no opinion of the Pope as I do not regard him as my spiritual leader, but for Mr Tatchell to stick his crooked, bitter beak into the doctrines of the Catholic Church simply because it doesn’t quite meet his militant and quite biased views on homosexual rights is pretty hypercritical. I should point out at this juncture that this is not an attack upon homosexual people, the rights of whom I would never question – more an attack upon people with an in-built agenda that borders on the inane.
The reality is that there is a very clear reason as to why people of his ilk focus their energies on Catholicism, Christianity, Right-wingism and such like. It is because they are inherently anti-establishment, owing to the bitterness of their formative years. Mr Tatchell has evidentially felt an outsider for so many years (he has a history of opposing Thatcher’s government and having to be reprimanded for extremism by none other than Michael Foot – a man with almost communist views himself which tells you something!), which means that the vast majority of his viewpoints are formed simply with the premise of standing against those he views as “part of the establishment.” That is to say Christians, right-wing politicians, the vast majority of English citizens, the military, the US, blah, blah, blah
If he is so concerned about the practices of Christianity, then where is he to be seen protesting against forced circumcision on Jewish males and Muslim females, or the oppression of women by Muslims? What about other evils of Islam, such as Halal meat, Sharia law, and the burka? He’s not interested in them simply because Islam is seen as the antithesis of the west, which makes it ok by him. As Churchill said of Stalin, "If Hitler invaded Hell, I would at least make a favourable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons." Moreover, there is an element of cowardice in the blind eye he turns towards other religions when their retribution is often more potent than that of the Pope or the Archibishop. Criticise a Christian and you might make them sad. Criticise a Muslim and they’ll threaten to cut your head off.
The point about these people is that they are no better than the fundamental Islamists who threaten to burn and bomb the west every time someone makes a joke about Allah. Both Tatchell and Bin Laden share the same preoccupation with being “offended” by everything the west does. If you don’t like the fact that the Pope doesn’t like homosexuals, then don’t become a Catholic. I’m not homophobic but I don’t care if certain religions are opposed to gay people because it makes no difference to my viewpoint – so long as they don’t harm others let them believe in whatever they choose to. I cant control people’s viewpoints – there are people who stand in the street draped in crucifixes claiming that Jesus told them they would rise from the dead and conquer Mars but I don’t stop them and tell them they’re mental as it’s a waste of time. When the Pastor in the US stated that he was going to burn the Koran, why should Muslims care? Offensive? I think someone burning a book is slightly less harmful than a bunch of nutcases flying planes into skyscrapers and killing over three thousand people. Whatever happened to sticks and stones?
Have you ever actually met Peter? and had a long discussion with him one to one? not just what the media want you to see/hear about him but a real discussion on human rights and even trivial things like the weather?
ReplyDeleteI've had the pleasure of knowing Peter for about 5 years and in my assessment he is one of the kindest and extremely honest person I have ever met, and I don't say that very often about people these days! the causes that he fights for and it is not just gay rights shows what kind of person he is and that is not how you portray him - Peter is a determined, selfless person who has little time for himself.
Don't judge a book by the cover, if you don't know the content.
No, I can’t say that I have ever spoken to Peter, but from what I’ve seen I don’t think I’d want to (I’ve certain better things to do than discuss the weather with him). My appraisal of him is based purely on the drivel that has come out of his mouth, not at all on how the media might have portrayed him. I have listened to him in countless interviews throughout the summer and have delved into transcripts of previous interviews he has given. The point is that he has made it his goal to shout his message aloud and has been quite determined to use the media to his own ends (I do not question his determination – but then again determination is certainly not an indicator of worth) and therefore any portrayal that may or may not have occurred is really only par for the course.
ReplyDeleteAs for him being a wonderful man, I have often found Tony Benn to appear quite charming, but that does not dissuade from the absolute drivel that comes from his mouth every time he talks.
So yes, I suppose I have judged the cover, but then I’ve examined the content as well.