Looks like god wasnt listening... should have become a mormon!
January 25, 2007 at 2:45 PM
Anonymous
said...
Things in Scotland are a little bit different on this . The Executive has given a commitment to the Catholic hierarchy and Scottish adoption law as it stands would allow Catholic adoption agencies to refer gays to other agencies.
The Scottish elections are on 3 May. In Labour's West Central Scotland heartland up to 30% of the electorate kick with the left foot.
January 25, 2007 at 2:54 PM
Anonymous
said...
Guido If that link is anything to go by you are either married to Nicole kidman or Hugo Rifkind. The evidence
Keith Urban ? nope
Does have flamboyant dress sense? Yes!
January 25, 2007 at 2:56 PM
Anonymous
said...
Still, look on the bright side - perhaps NuLab have pissed off enough catholic voters to make a difference...
January 25, 2007 at 2:57 PM
Anonymous
said...
Harriet Harman seems to be against what she calls "discrimination" but quite comfortable with what most of us would call insensitive intolerance.
Dream scenario: Ruth crosses the floor of the house and becomes the next Home Sec.
January 25, 2007 at 2:59 PM
Anonymous
said...
Would you believe it - the heathens have set up a petition to have her removed from office - she will be mortified!
Well with little Ruthie failing to get St Toni of B-Liar to change his view on adoption that looks like curtains for her. Excommunication and no more scourging.
January 25, 2007 at 3:00 PM
Anonymous
said...
Ruth's department seems to be in more than a spot of bother. See here:
Harman is a sanctimonious bitch, who knows best, and as a fully paid up stalinlite, expects the proles to do as they are told. Andrew Neil was having great fun goading her today.
January 25, 2007 at 3:03 PM
Anonymous
said...
New Labour and the gay mafia have pushed it a bit too far this time.
So... are we going to discriminate against gays or discriminate against religious nutters? Or are we going to give the religious nutters the right to discriminate against gays? If we do that we'll have to give gays the right to discriminate against religious nutters. Or maybe we could maintain the status quo whereby we're allowed to discriminate against both gays and religious nutters? I lost track: are gays and/or religious nutters allowed to discriminate against me at the moment?
January 25, 2007 at 3:16 PM
Anonymous
said...
As an Anglican Nancy Boy on the road to Rome, I have to say what a lot of nonsense this all is.
Why on Earth would us woofters want to adopt children through agencies that did not want us to adopt children?!
January 25, 2007 at 3:18 PM
Anonymous
said...
This so called goverment pushing for a pufters charter ,are they in the same country as us or a they on drugs ,I think they must be on something ,taking on the 2 main religious groups ,do they think they can walk all over these groups, I think they should be booking the furniture vans for 10 and 11
January 25, 2007 at 3:24 PM
Anonymous
said...
Its the one size fits all ethos, that NuLab are peddling that is scary, its the sort of thing you expect from dictatorships and autarchies
perhaps NuLab have pissed off enough catholic voters to make a difference...
and maybe enough gay people too?
January 25, 2007 at 3:31 PM
Anonymous
said...
Hm. How can Saint Ruth be Minister for Women AND Equality?
Perhaps this is her get-out clause. She is allowed two simultaneous policies to promote positive discrimination on both counts.
PS Guido, the halo's pants. Looks like 1970's Roger Moore allowing for subsequent devaluation.
January 25, 2007 at 3:34 PM
Anonymous
said...
Apparently, as the blogger's wife, with child, pram and luggage in hand, struggled to board a crowded flight some months ago, Kelly stood up and gave her a hand.
Whose was it? Escrivá's?
January 25, 2007 at 3:38 PM
Anonymous
said...
A friend of Gordon asks:
"Why on Earth would us woofters want to adopt children through agencies that did not want us to adopt children?!"
Because you'd like the drama and being the centre of attention?
January 25, 2007 at 3:45 PM
Anonymous
said...
nobody has bothered to ask us muslims what we think about all this.
it's all a fuss about nothing, they wouldn't want to adopt after a good stoning.
or at least after a 100 lashes if they haven't tied the knot yet.
Here's what will happen. Because 'discrimination' against gay adoption will be specifically banned, that will mean gay adoption will be virtually guaranteed on demand.
No adoption agency will dare refuse such a request because they know they wouldn't stand a chance of arguing against a gay couple. In effect, there are now no reasons to refuse a gay couple other than the dreaded 'discrimination'.
By stark contrast, there have been endless examples of boring old hetros being given the piss-off by local councils for being variously too fat, too white, too middle class and too fortysomething. Sinister.
What I object to is the effing special treatment that is being enshrined in law. Why can't gay couples take their chances like everyone else?
It's was not enough to be tolerant, we had to celebrate diversity. And now 'celebration' is complusory by law.
January 25, 2007 at 3:49 PM
Anonymous
said...
Guido I can't work out if you are serious or not (I suspect the latter) but a question has to be asked. Are we now being governed by secular fundamentalists?
1. I hope those of you who want the churches to "take a stand" will feel the same way when they want to ban contraceptives and make adultery punishable by stoning.
2. If you have no experience of the adoption process, you probably don't know what an utter shambles it is. It's already discriminatory on many levels; for example, a white child may not be adopted by a black couple, gay or straight. Oh, you didn't know that?
January 25, 2007 at 4:03 PM
Anonymous
said...
3.59pm - Jeremy, you should use your real name. You're among friends here. I'm glad you're back on the box too.
January 25, 2007 at 4:13 PM
Anonymous
said...
"this orphaned kid needs a father and a mother"
totally confused here - how the hell is that "discrimination"? its just an opinion - as much as "this kid needs a mother but does not need a father" is another opinion. Or as much as "this Jewish kid would be better off with a Jewish adoptive family".
is all that "discrimination"? people are, or rather, were, free to have opinions in this country.
answers on a postcard please to the Ministry of Silly Walks, c/o Whitehall, London.
January 25, 2007 at 4:22 PM
Anonymous
said...
one simple question..........
Just how many of the Cabinet are Gay
And why are they so keen to promnote the 'Rights of Gays'
and could they be the same ones who wanted to lower the age of consent (i.e. more fresh youing meet?)
Have the poor bloody kids got no Human Rights?
I remember, this lot of snake oil salesmen have already brain washed us
for they are whiter than white.
Remember?
January 25, 2007 at 4:27 PM
Anonymous
said...
Shock horror ! Government minister turns out to be a human being ! Wasn't that always the most reliable test though ? That you can tell what kind of person someone is by how they treat people they don't have to be nice to.
Ruth Kelly is the ideal test of whether people can separate out personality from policy. Can we love the sinner, even though we hate the sin ?
Sorry to be a moralising bore etc.
January 25, 2007 at 4:29 PM
Anonymous
said...
Reference this most divisive argument of which the large proportion of the population are shying away from,but the implications to them and society at large are quite severe or realistic. SEX by homosexuals is not part of natural law.As a surgeon in a major hospital my main work load, is now the increasing number of men of all ages who are having to attend for anal rectification work.Simply, the human anal cannot withstand the pulverising which a female vagina can take.The consequence is that fissures and bruising of the retractive muscles is often not repairable leaving the individual in a lifetime of discomfort.
My professional view is that the lifetime experience of the Law Of Moses remains a basic tenet of our sexual behaviour and is one not to mix with the innocence of childhood.
January 25, 2007 at 4:33 PM
Anonymous
said...
london surgeon, 4.33
What the fuck has your professional opinion got to do with theology?
January 25, 2007 at 4:38 PM
Anonymous
said...
My own blog deals with the issue of gayers and adoption.
January 25, 2007 at 4:53 PM
Anonymous
said...
and Tom cruise
two subjects that are entirely unconected , have a look
January 25, 2007 at 4:53 PM
Anonymous
said...
How come an alleged surgeon can't spell for shite? Standards dropping in the NHS, are they? Or are you just talking bollocks?
Mikey (not a surgeon)
January 25, 2007 at 5:07 PM
Anonymous
said...
Is anyone else sick to fucking death of the increasingly loud-mouthed "militant gay lobby", and their fellow travellers in New Labour and the BBC.
How much more "in ya face" are they going to get before people stand up to them?
Perhaps they've bitten off more than they can chew taking on Rome?
Surely the backlash against militant gays, multi-culti diversity, criminals rights and all the rest of the shit drowning the country is getting closer.
January 25, 2007 at 5:25 PM
Anonymous
said...
An ex of mine had a window cleaner who was a homosexual , his arsehole collapsed and he had to shove a tampon up his jacksy to keep his insides and poop where they should be. anal sex is unhealthy
He has written a 7,000 word essay today on Page 3.
January 25, 2007 at 5:51 PM
Anonymous
said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
January 25, 2007 at 6:05 PM
Anonymous
said...
It's child abuse to force a gay household on homeless children. The happiest and best-adjusted children grow up with a man and a woman in the house and they learn how to relate to both. If they want to mix around with gays as friends (or lovers) as adults, that is their privilege. But a household with a mother and a father gives any child the most secure background and the best hope of growing up well-adjusted.
This is nothing against gay people. Like most women, I like being around gay men. But I think this is a bit much for a child to cope with. They have plenty to do coping with growing up without having to deal with this.
Also, it is nauseating that socialists can force their own moral standards down the throats of previously free citizens. The jackboot of thought fascism (aka political correctness) is on the British neck. Why is the moral level of the godawful, 20th rate British cabinet judged superior to my own moral judgement, or the moral judgement of a church that has been going for considerably longer than the 100 years that socialism has been slithering around?
January 25, 2007 at 6:07 PM
Anonymous
said...
"1. I hope those of you who want the churches to "take a stand" will feel the same way when they want to ban contraceptives and make adultery punishable by stoning."
The right of a private individual or organisation to discriminate on moral grounds is hardly comparable to demanding the government punish consenting behaviour.
January 25, 2007 at 6:12 PM
Anonymous
said...
I suppose all this is just another step on the ladder, to the labour government making it compulsory for everyone in the country to become a practising shirtlifter, (at least in public places and the workplace). They wouldnt wish to be branded as totalitarian and enforce this rule in peoples private homes, (not just yet anyway).
January 25, 2007 at 6:12 PM
Anonymous
said...
This is the most horrifying government in British history and its jackbooted approach to other people's moral codes traduces every principle that civil, tolerant Britain once stood for.
January 25, 2007 at 6:16 PM
Anonymous
said...
Verity said... This is the most horrifying government in British history and its jackbooted approach to other people's moral codes traduces every principle that civil, tolerant Britain once stood for.
Er, no its not. When was a British Government ever "civil and tolerant" to anyone other that fat white straight British people (or, in other words, themselves)?
"The most horrifying Government in British history"? What the fuck are you on about? Are you suggesting that loans for lordships is worse than, for example, the Irish potato famine?
Has your meals on wheels deliverer nicked your meds again?
It's child abuse to force a gay household on homeless children
It is lucky you fuckwits are too stupid to vote.
The Sexual Orientation Regulations - if you bother to read them and don't believe Christian propoganda - are sensible and just.
Don't fucking turn up outside my house with your pitchforks you mob lot
January 25, 2007 at 6:29 PM
Anonymous
said...
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. Thomas Jefferson
I agree with Verity. I am very, very afraid of this government.
January 25, 2007 at 6:30 PM
Anonymous
said...
dingdongthewitchisdead
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time. As long as they're not Tories - they're so old, drunk or deranged that they've usually forgotten the start of your sentence by the time you reach the end, so you can tell them anything you like really."
Abraham Lincoln (as amended)
I wouldn't worry about the government. If this groundswell of public opinion you lot keep prattling on about is real, you'll get a chance to vote them out in a couple of years. Like last year. Remember that? The Labour victory?
I'm not even that much of a Labour supporter, but reading you comedians reminds me that the alternative is the Tories - its enough to get me memorising "the red flag" and organising refugee welcome parties...
January 25, 2007 at 6:41 PM
Anonymous
said...
Bhownaggree, since you are so fearless in defence of the government, will you please let everyone know the nature of your work? Is it:
(A) For the government (B) For the Labour Party (C) For both of the above (since they're a little hazy these days about the propriety of spending taxpayers' money for political purposes) (D) For an organization which is friendly to the Labour Party
or
(E) None of these? If so, please elucidate. Are you unemployed? In prison? In a mental hospital?
Thx. PIF.
January 25, 2007 at 6:43 PM
Anonymous
said...
I'm not even that much of a Labour supporter
I think you doth protest too much, *Pete*.
January 25, 2007 at 6:44 PM
Anonymous
said...
Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead and Pete, who is clearly not a student of history: I spotted tony blair as mad the first time I ever saw him on TV. I spotted the slithy toves in the cabinet as jackbooted, self-congratulatory thought fascists when they'd only been in office for a few days.
Two years later, I'd sold my house and left the country rather than live under a lunatic, obessessive, authoritarian regime. Since blair slithered in, three million of my fellow citizens have packed up and voted with their feet for liberty and tolerance and no NHS and similar hordes of grotesque, powerful, faceless quangoes.
Pete writes: "Has your meals on wheels deliverer nicked your meds again?" What a barren, grey, constricted world you live in if this was the worst insult you could come up with, you intolerant little twerp.
January 25, 2007 at 6:45 PM
Anonymous
said...
What a barren, grey, constricted world you live in
This is what they want for us all Verity. You can't blame Pete. He knows no better.
January 25, 2007 at 6:49 PM
Anonymous
said...
bhownaggree:
If we could turn you into a 13 year old and send you to an inner city comprehensive as the adopted son of a gay couple, then you might discover the meaning of abuse.
Of course, you could just be Guido in disguise doing a bit of trolling, nobody could actually believe all the stuff you spout...
January 25, 2007 at 6:56 PM
Anonymous
said...
Verity
Ah, so you don't live here. Explains a lot: no doubt your view of the country is through a drip feed of the Mail and Telegraph. Do you not see the inherent stupidity of commenting on something about which you have no direct everyday experience?
Yes, 3 million people have left - people who have been able to do so because of a strong economy that has helped make them rich. Good for them - and you. Means I wont run the risk of meeting you in person. Although if you'd stayed longer, you would have made more on your house and could have moved further away, which would, let's face it, have been better for all concerned.
And no, that is by far the mildest insult I could come up with.
Wait a moment... mad as a march hare, hallmarks of public school, right wing loon, left the country when Labour came to power... It's PHIL COLLINS!!! You're nothing without Genesis - NOTHING
January 25, 2007 at 6:57 PM
Anonymous
said...
Discrimination is actually a GOOD thing. Look it up in the dictionary. It is UNFAIR discrimination which is the baddie. There are obvious circumstances where it is quite unfair to discriminate against somebody who has particular behavioural patterns. Nobody would sugest that it was wrong for a heterosexual or christian female to decline to even consider other females among those with whom she might proffer an invitation to a private intimate adventure, for example. At the other end of the spectrum, very few indeed would suggest that it is at all reasonable that you should refuse to contemplate selling your car to someone whose skin is a different colour to your own. The problem is that we do not all agree which activities fall closer to each of the two examples quoted above. Sexual oriented behaviour which is profoundly different to one's own (whether obviously manifested or just potentially there) is only one of a number of 'behavioral types' where a sizable number of people, including many with no obvious religious or formal philosophical position, think that they should personally be quite free to discriminate and also to indoctrinate their children for the period in which they hold authority over them. Pretend otherwise at your peril.
January 25, 2007 at 7:06 PM
Anonymous
said...
"you intolerant little twerp"
Verty, in his "grey constricted world", he appears to have produced a better class of insult than your own pathetic attempt. Do you think, to our nation's great shame, he was provided with a superior education to yours?
January 25, 2007 at 7:09 PM
Anonymous
said...
The current issue of Private Eye carries a story about David Miliband. Addressing a gala dinner of Labour supporters and Trade Unionists he said 'Wasn't the Labour Party fortunate that when the trade unions were looking for a party to affiliate to, they chose the Labour Party?'
Typical of the middle class opportunists who hijacked the party of 'social justice' to further their own agenda.
January 25, 2007 at 7:23 PM
Anonymous
said...
pete No doubt you like taking it up the chuff and it it the most natural thing in the world. Most people find that kind of activity to be repulsive , despite what they have been bullied into saying by those of your ilk.
January 25, 2007 at 7:24 PM
Anonymous
said...
Hitch...
Never having tried, can't say I like or dislike it. What was your experience that turned you against it so vehemently?
January 25, 2007 at 7:31 PM
Anonymous
said...
That pic on Hitches blog would put most people off.
January 25, 2007 at 7:33 PM
Anonymous
said...
Pete - who doesn't know when to shut up, which doutless accounts for his lack of success and his constricted world view - writes: "no doubt your view of the country is through a drip feed of the Mail and Telegraph." Well, I don't know why you use the term "drip feed", but you certainly do seem to relate to the NHS, but I also watch the BBC for a touch of the grotesque. And The Times. And, if my stomach is strong enough, I might read Polly Toynbee without retching.
If you think the British economy is strong, you are an economic illiterate. Is that why interest rates keep going up? Two more rises predicted before the end of summer!
Pete writes: "Do you not see the inherent stupidity of commenting on something about which you have no direct everyday experience?" Why do I get the feeling that you are noisy and prolix in your opinions of the United States? Just a thought.
BTW, no need for the NHS meds you refer to when a bottle of medium-level Scotch whisky costs just £7. And I'm well away from the insane tony blair, the psychologically flawed gordon brown, and the grotesque cabinet of retards and knaves.
I do hope Ruth Kelly crosses the floor.
January 25, 2007 at 7:33 PM
Anonymous
said...
.......Ah, so you don't live here. Explains a lot: no doubt your view of the country is through a drip feed of the Mail and Telegraph. Do you not see the inh........
And so on in the usual nulabour cunt mode....I suppose that twat millibland is still about is he? Or are you just his tame dick licker?
January 25, 2007 at 7:36 PM
Anonymous
said...
Anonymous wrote in defence of "Pete" - Verty, in his "grey constricted world", he appears to have produced a better class of insult than your own pathetic attempt. Perhaps I'm not motivated by class hatred?
January 25, 2007 at 7:46 PM
Anonymous
said...
If you think the British economy is strong, you are an economic illiterate. Is that why interest rates keep going up? Two more rises predicted before the end of summer!
Zhu Min, the Bank of China's executive vice-president, said
"The global imbalances are becoming more concentrated, not less," he said. While China is adding to its colossal reserves at a rate of $200bn (£102bn) a year, five countries, led by the US and Britain, now account for 84pc of the $1,000bn of trade deficits in the global system.
January 25, 2007 at 7:51 PM
Anonymous
said...
Phil (your secret's out now!)
When you see me make a comment on the states, you may throw that comment at me - until then, wind your neck in.
Whatever happens to the economy in the future, it has grown faster, stronger and for longer under Gordon Brown than at any other time in British history. That is a fact. Economic predictions are about as much use as your facile observations on Britain - not much.
And the chances of Ruth Kelly crossing the floor are about the same as Guido getting a seat in cabinet. And then shagging you to celebrate.
January 25, 2007 at 7:54 PM
Anonymous
said...
Pete: Whatever happens to the economy in the future, it has grown faster, stronger and for longer under Gordon Brown
Ha ha, you are a LuLab Troll and I claim my £5.
January 25, 2007 at 7:57 PM
Anonymous
said...
Verity (if you insist in retaining your pseudonym)
I'm not motivated by any hatred - small minded, petty, ill-informed views such as yours get my goat that's all.
anonymous 7.36 - take a deep breath and try again.
voyager - long term debt is a problem. But my previous comment stands.
January 25, 2007 at 7:59 PM
Anonymous
said...
pete - the British economy is on the verge of collapse under the inept,chippy stewardship of the creepy Gordon Brown.
Voyager, thanks for those figures.
January 25, 2007 at 8:03 PM
Anonymous
said...
And it would not surprise me if Ruth Kelly crossed the floor. She is a conservative at heart.
January 25, 2007 at 8:05 PM
Anonymous
said...
pete if you were to scrape together a few credit card apps and fill them in correctly you could have 100k in your hand within a month, then piss the lot up the wall in a week and have a pretty nice time, then you either have to pay the cash back or go buts, this is in effect what this government has done, if you are under 40 and relying on the state to look after you in future years I am pleased to say that you are about to get royally fucked (not in the way you like) serves you right for voting Labour. And Pete if you are so bothered about the sensibilities of others why all the hatred focussed upon a lady you have never met? If you want to trade insults try me
January 25, 2007 at 8:12 PM
Anonymous
said...
Phil
Is that "on the verge of a collapse" as it was in 2001
or 2003 http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=51156
or 2004 http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=115846
or 2005 http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=125900
or last year http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=130124
or is it a completely different collapse?
BTW I realise I am very lucky to have all you economics professors at my fingertips...
January 25, 2007 at 8:20 PM
Anonymous
said...
peter h
When did I say I was worried about the sensibilities of others? Don't mistake hatred for contempt.
The analogy of credit cards is pretty facile, but that's not to say it wont come true. I'm no economics professor, but I'm willing to bet that you aren't either. After ten years of Tories saying that Labour are on the verge of recession (my post above), you'll excuse me if I don't take it that seriously.
And the point you make about pensions etc is true of every developed country pretty much without exception, and has nothing to do with Brown.
And if you want an insult, be my guest fuckface.
January 25, 2007 at 8:27 PM
Anonymous
said...
pensions brown raided them to the tune of 5 billion a year fuck other countries. Fuck the conservative party they are also fuckwits , we have them to thank for our lack of a manufacturing base, the real crunch will come when the dollar loses its reserve status , boy are we in for trouble.
January 25, 2007 at 8:51 PM
Anonymous
said...
peter h
What is the relevance of the dollar reserve? (Excuse my ignorance - I told you I wasn't an economics professor)
January 25, 2007 at 8:54 PM
Anonymous
said...
pete the dollar is known as the currency of reserve, as in a paper has intrinsic value in itself just as gold does, that is why all commodities are priced in dollars, people accumulate dollar in the same way they accumulate gold i.e. they believe that they can exchange it for goods and services, unlike gold the dollar doesn't make good jewellery, so come the day when people realise that america (like ourselves) produces fuck all apart from fat people and co2 they are going to look at that dirty piece of paper and see it for what it is a piece of paper you wouldn't wipe your bottom with. What has america (or the uk) got that china really wants? we give them bits of paper and they give us dvd players, how long will that go on for? You may also note that china is quietly buying up Africa, don't believe for one minute that they are doing it to help the poor african folk. Im slightly pissed and watching CBB so i hope that made sense.
January 25, 2007 at 9:20 PM
Anonymous
said...
perfect sense. cheers.
January 25, 2007 at 9:25 PM
Anonymous
said...
PHitch - I too have noticed that China is buying up Africa, the richest land mass, in terms of natural resources, in the world.
This century is going to be dominated by China and India. The US (and the Anglosphere)will continue to be an engine of economic and military growth, but will divvy it up with China and India, both of which already have very powerful, well-disciplined militaries.
January 25, 2007 at 9:59 PM
Anonymous
said...
oh dear. the comment bores are out.
Guido , are you there?
January 25, 2007 at 10:14 PM
Anonymous
said...
verity My money is on India (Hindi India) Good set of moral values but still know how to have a good time. And "thick of it" you know where the door is. On the other hand you could say something entertaining rather than just bitching.
YOU CLOWN!
January 25, 2007 at 10:25 PM
Anonymous
said...
Verity said:
"...the moral judgement of a church..."
You mean the one that covers up sexual predations by its priests?
January 26, 2007 at 12:06 AM
Anonymous
said...
Guido, I'm confused. Who is this young Irish person with the halo? It doesn't look like Ruth Kelly, to judge by the picture of her you posted on this blog a few days ago.
January 26, 2007 at 1:10 AM
Anonymous
said...
David Chapell - And? I know nothing about sexual predations by RC priests because I'm not RC and am not interested in the micro, not being an obsessive.
I don't see how sexual predations by some priests translates into the attempted theft by spiteful lefties from hundreds of millions of RC's of their faith in God.
So that Tony and Gordon and Peter and all the rest of the roiling nest of Labour can feel good about themselves? Doesn't compute.
Come up with a more intelligent premise, there's a good lad.
Meant to say this much earlier. But that is a lovely story. Can't see that many Ps of any party doing this. Well done Ruth. But you should get a free transfer to another job as soon as you can. But please don't be the Portillo of your generation. Make sure you look after Bolton and make them love you as much as Fawkes does.
January 26, 2007 at 2:12 AM
Anonymous
said...
You have been busy Guido. It must have taken a while to find a flattering phot for this one. It goes to show that even Ruth scrubs up well on occasion. Or could it be that her normal phots reflect her life working with a bunch of deranged morons, as colleagues.
January 26, 2007 at 6:12 AM
Anonymous
said...
Two bits of righteousness in one week Guido! Must be a record, keep it up and your sure to go to heaven!
81 comments:
Looks like god wasnt listening... should have become a mormon!
Things in Scotland are a little bit different on this . The Executive has given a commitment to the Catholic hierarchy and Scottish adoption law as it stands would allow Catholic adoption agencies to refer gays to other agencies.
The Scottish elections are on 3 May. In Labour's West Central Scotland heartland up to 30% of the electorate kick with the left foot.
Guido
If that link is anything to go by you are either married to Nicole kidman or Hugo Rifkind.
The evidence
Keith Urban ? nope
Does have flamboyant dress sense?
Yes!
Still, look on the bright side - perhaps NuLab have pissed off enough catholic voters to make a difference...
Harriet Harman seems to be against what she calls "discrimination" but quite comfortable with what most of us would call insensitive intolerance.
Dream scenario: Ruth crosses the floor of the house and becomes the next Home Sec.
Would you believe it - the heathens have set up a petition to have her removed from office - she will be mortified!
Petition calling for the removal of Ruth Kelly as Minister for Women and Equality
Well with little Ruthie failing to get St Toni of B-Liar to change his view on adoption that looks like curtains for her.
Excommunication and no more scourging.
Ruth's department seems to be in more than a spot of bother. See here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/01/25/nlab125.xml
Harman is a sanctimonious bitch, who knows best, and as a fully paid up stalinlite, expects the proles to do as they are told.
Andrew Neil was having great fun goading her today.
New Labour and the gay mafia have pushed it a bit too far this time.
So... are we going to discriminate against gays or discriminate against religious nutters? Or are we going to give the religious nutters the right to discriminate against gays? If we do that we'll have to give gays the right to discriminate against religious nutters. Or maybe we could maintain the status quo whereby we're allowed to discriminate against both gays and religious nutters? I lost track: are gays and/or religious nutters allowed to discriminate against me at the moment?
As an Anglican Nancy Boy on the road to Rome, I have to say what a lot of nonsense this all is.
Why on Earth would us woofters want to adopt children through agencies that did not want us to adopt children?!
This so called goverment pushing for a pufters charter ,are they in the same country as us or a they on drugs ,I think they must be on something ,taking on the 2 main religious groups ,do they think they can walk all over these groups, I think they should be booking the furniture vans for 10 and 11
Its the one size fits all ethos, that NuLab are peddling that is scary, its the sort of thing you expect from dictatorships and autarchies
perhaps NuLab have pissed off enough catholic voters to make a difference...
and maybe enough gay people too?
Hm. How can Saint Ruth be Minister for Women AND Equality?
Perhaps this is her get-out clause. She is allowed two simultaneous policies to promote positive discrimination on both counts.
PS Guido, the halo's pants. Looks like 1970's Roger Moore allowing for subsequent devaluation.
Apparently, as the blogger's wife, with child, pram and luggage in hand, struggled to board a crowded flight some months ago, Kelly stood up and gave her a hand.
Whose was it? Escrivá's?
A friend of Gordon asks:
"Why on Earth would us woofters want to adopt children through agencies that did not want us to adopt children?!"
Because you'd like the drama and being the centre of attention?
nobody has bothered to ask us muslims what we think about all this.
it's all a fuss about nothing, they wouldn't want to adopt after a good stoning.
or at least after a 100 lashes if they haven't tied the knot yet.
me, i'm off to paradise to bag a few virgins.
Allbloodytaken at 3:40
Now that would be an unholy alliance.
Here's what will happen. Because 'discrimination' against gay adoption will be specifically banned, that will mean gay adoption will be virtually guaranteed on demand.
No adoption agency will dare refuse such a request because they know they wouldn't stand a chance of arguing against a gay couple. In effect, there are now no reasons to refuse a gay couple other than the dreaded 'discrimination'.
By stark contrast, there have been endless examples of boring old hetros being given the piss-off by local councils for being variously too fat, too white, too middle class and too fortysomething. Sinister.
What I object to is the effing special treatment that is being enshrined in law. Why can't gay couples take their chances like everyone else?
It's was not enough to be tolerant, we had to celebrate diversity. And now 'celebration' is complusory by law.
Guido I can't work out if you are serious or not (I suspect the latter) but a question has to be asked. Are we now being governed by secular fundamentalists?
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2007/01/rise-of-secular-fundamentalism.html
A couple of serious points (sorry, Guido):
1. I hope those of you who want the churches to "take a stand" will feel the same way when they want to ban contraceptives and make adultery punishable by stoning.
2. If you have no experience of the adoption process, you probably don't know what an utter shambles it is. It's already discriminatory on many levels; for example, a white child may not be adopted by a black couple, gay or straight. Oh, you didn't know that?
3.59pm - Jeremy, you should use your real name. You're among friends here. I'm glad you're back on the box too.
"this orphaned kid needs a father and a mother"
totally confused here - how the hell is that "discrimination"?
its just an opinion - as much as "this kid needs a mother but does not need a father" is another opinion. Or as much as "this Jewish kid would be better off with a Jewish adoptive family".
is all that "discrimination"?
people are, or rather, were, free to have opinions in this country.
answers on a postcard please to the
Ministry of Silly Walks,
c/o Whitehall,
London.
one simple question..........
Just how many of the Cabinet are Gay
And why are they so keen to promnote the 'Rights of Gays'
and could they be the same ones who wanted to lower the age of consent
(i.e. more fresh youing meet?)
Have the poor bloody kids got no Human Rights?
I remember, this lot of snake oil salesmen have already brain washed us
for they are whiter than white.
Remember?
Shock horror ! Government minister turns out to be a human being ! Wasn't that always the most reliable test though ? That you can tell what kind of person someone is by how they treat people they don't have to be nice to.
Ruth Kelly is the ideal test of whether people can separate out personality from policy. Can we love the sinner, even though we hate the sin ?
Sorry to be a moralising bore etc.
Reference this most divisive argument of which the large proportion of the population are shying away from,but the implications to them and society at large are quite severe or realistic.
SEX by homosexuals is not part of natural law.As a surgeon in a major hospital my main work load, is now the increasing number of men of all ages who are having to attend for anal rectification work.Simply, the human anal cannot withstand the pulverising which a female vagina can take.The consequence is that fissures and bruising of the retractive muscles is often not repairable leaving the individual in a lifetime of discomfort.
My professional view is that the lifetime experience of the Law Of Moses remains a basic tenet of our sexual behaviour and is one not to mix with the innocence of childhood.
london surgeon, 4.33
What the fuck has your professional opinion got to do with theology?
My own blog deals with the issue of gayers and adoption.
and Tom cruise
two subjects that are entirely unconected , have a look
How come an alleged surgeon can't spell for shite? Standards dropping in the NHS, are they? Or are you just talking bollocks?
Mikey
(not a surgeon)
Is anyone else sick to fucking death of the increasingly loud-mouthed "militant gay lobby", and their fellow travellers in New Labour and the BBC.
How much more "in ya face" are they going to get before people stand up to them?
Perhaps they've bitten off more than they can chew taking on Rome?
Surely the backlash against militant gays, multi-culti diversity, criminals rights and all the rest of the shit drowning the country is getting closer.
An ex of mine had a window cleaner who was a homosexual , his arsehole collapsed and he had to shove a tampon up his jacksy to keep his insides and poop where they should be.
anal sex is unhealthy
Please can everyone stop winding up Tim Ireland.
He has written a 7,000 word essay today on Page 3.
It's child abuse to force a gay household on homeless children. The happiest and best-adjusted children grow up with a man and a woman in the house and they learn how to relate to both. If they want to mix around with gays as friends (or lovers) as adults, that is their privilege. But a household with a mother and a father gives any child the most secure background and the best hope of growing up well-adjusted.
This is nothing against gay people. Like most women, I like being around gay men. But I think this is a bit much for a child to cope with. They have plenty to do coping with growing up without having to deal with this.
Also, it is nauseating that socialists can force their own moral standards down the throats of previously free citizens. The jackboot of thought fascism (aka political correctness) is on the British neck. Why is the moral level of the godawful, 20th rate British cabinet judged superior to my own moral judgement, or the moral judgement of a church that has been going for considerably longer than the 100 years that socialism has been slithering around?
"1. I hope those of you who want the churches to "take a stand" will feel the same way when they want to ban contraceptives and make adultery punishable by stoning."
The right of a private individual or organisation to discriminate on moral grounds is hardly comparable to demanding the government punish consenting behaviour.
I suppose all this is just another step on the ladder, to the labour government making it compulsory for everyone in the country to become a practising shirtlifter, (at least in public places and the workplace). They wouldnt wish to be branded as totalitarian and enforce this rule in peoples private homes, (not just yet anyway).
This is the most horrifying government in British history and its jackbooted approach to other people's moral codes traduces every principle that civil, tolerant Britain once stood for.
Verity said...
This is the most horrifying government in British history and its jackbooted approach to other people's moral codes traduces every principle that civil, tolerant Britain once stood for.
Er, no its not. When was a British Government ever "civil and tolerant" to anyone other that fat white straight British people (or, in other words, themselves)?
"The most horrifying Government in British history"? What the fuck are you on about? Are you suggesting that loans for lordships is worse than, for example, the Irish potato famine?
Has your meals on wheels deliverer nicked your meds again?
It's child abuse to force a gay household on homeless children
It is lucky you fuckwits are too stupid to vote.
The Sexual Orientation Regulations - if you bother to read them and don't believe Christian propoganda - are sensible and just.
Don't fucking turn up outside my house with your pitchforks you mob lot
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
Thomas Jefferson
I agree with Verity. I am very, very afraid of this government.
dingdongthewitchisdead
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time. As long as they're not Tories - they're so old, drunk or deranged that they've usually forgotten the start of your sentence by the time you reach the end, so you can tell them anything you like really."
Abraham Lincoln (as amended)
I wouldn't worry about the government. If this groundswell of public opinion you lot keep prattling on about is real, you'll get a chance to vote them out in a couple of years. Like last year. Remember that? The Labour victory?
I'm not even that much of a Labour supporter, but reading you comedians reminds me that the alternative is the Tories - its enough to get me memorising "the red flag" and organising refugee welcome parties...
Bhownaggree, since you are so fearless in defence of the government, will you please let everyone know the nature of your work? Is it:
(A) For the government
(B) For the Labour Party
(C) For both of the above (since they're a little hazy these days about the propriety of spending taxpayers' money for political purposes)
(D) For an organization which is friendly to the Labour Party
or
(E) None of these? If so, please elucidate. Are you unemployed? In prison? In a mental hospital?
Thx. PIF.
I'm not even that much of a Labour supporter
I think you doth protest too much, *Pete*.
Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead and Pete, who is clearly not a student of history: I spotted tony blair as mad the first time I ever saw him on TV. I spotted the slithy toves in the cabinet as jackbooted, self-congratulatory thought fascists when they'd only been in office for a few days.
Two years later, I'd sold my house and left the country rather than live under a lunatic, obessessive, authoritarian regime. Since blair slithered in, three million of my fellow citizens have packed up and voted with their feet for liberty and tolerance and no NHS and similar hordes of grotesque, powerful, faceless quangoes.
Pete writes: "Has your meals on wheels deliverer nicked your meds again?" What a barren, grey, constricted world you live in if this was the worst insult you could come up with, you intolerant little twerp.
What a barren, grey, constricted world you live in
This is what they want for us all Verity. You can't blame Pete. He knows no better.
bhownaggree:
If we could turn you into a 13 year old and send you to an inner city comprehensive as the adopted son of a gay couple, then you might discover the meaning of abuse.
Of course, you could just be Guido in disguise doing a bit of trolling, nobody could actually believe all the stuff you spout...
Verity
Ah, so you don't live here. Explains a lot: no doubt your view of the country is through a drip feed of the Mail and Telegraph. Do you not see the inherent stupidity of commenting on something about which you have no direct everyday experience?
Yes, 3 million people have left - people who have been able to do so because of a strong economy that has helped make them rich. Good for them - and you. Means I wont run the risk of meeting you in person. Although if you'd stayed longer, you would have made more on your house and could have moved further away, which would, let's face it, have been better for all concerned.
And no, that is by far the mildest insult I could come up with.
Wait a moment... mad as a march hare, hallmarks of public school, right wing loon, left the country when Labour came to power... It's PHIL COLLINS!!! You're nothing without Genesis - NOTHING
Discrimination is actually a GOOD thing. Look it up in the dictionary. It is UNFAIR discrimination which is the baddie. There are obvious circumstances where it is quite unfair to discriminate against somebody who has particular behavioural patterns. Nobody would sugest that it was wrong for a heterosexual or christian female to decline to even consider other females among those with whom she might proffer an invitation to a private intimate adventure, for example. At the other end of the spectrum, very few indeed would suggest that it is at all reasonable that you should refuse to contemplate selling your car to someone whose skin is a different colour to your own. The problem is that we do not all agree which activities fall closer to each of the two examples quoted above. Sexual oriented behaviour which is profoundly different to one's own (whether obviously manifested or just potentially there) is only one of a number of 'behavioral types' where a sizable number of people, including many with no obvious religious or formal philosophical position, think that they should personally be quite free to discriminate and also to indoctrinate their children for the period in which they hold authority over them. Pretend otherwise at your peril.
"you intolerant little twerp"
Verty, in his "grey constricted world", he appears to have produced a better class of insult than your own pathetic attempt. Do you think, to our nation's great shame, he was provided with a superior education to yours?
The current issue of Private Eye carries a story about David Miliband. Addressing a gala dinner of Labour supporters and Trade Unionists he said
'Wasn't the Labour Party fortunate that when the trade unions were looking for a party to affiliate to, they chose the Labour Party?'
Typical of the middle class opportunists who hijacked the party of 'social justice' to further their own agenda.
pete
No doubt you like taking it up the chuff and it it the most natural thing in the world.
Most people find that kind of activity to be repulsive , despite what they have been bullied into saying by those of your ilk.
Hitch...
Never having tried, can't say I like or dislike it. What was your experience that turned you against it so vehemently?
That pic on Hitches blog would put most people off.
Pete - who doesn't know when to shut up, which doutless accounts for his lack of success and his constricted world view - writes: "no doubt your view of the country is through a drip feed of the Mail and Telegraph." Well, I don't know why you use the term "drip feed", but you certainly do seem to relate to the NHS, but I also watch the BBC for a touch of the grotesque. And The Times. And, if my stomach is strong enough, I might read Polly Toynbee without retching.
If you think the British economy is strong, you are an economic illiterate. Is that why interest rates keep going up? Two more rises predicted before the end of summer!
Pete writes: "Do you not see the inherent stupidity of commenting on something about which you have no direct everyday experience?" Why do I get the feeling that you are noisy and prolix in your opinions of the United States? Just a thought.
BTW, no need for the NHS meds you refer to when a bottle of medium-level Scotch whisky costs just £7. And I'm well away from the insane tony blair, the psychologically flawed gordon brown, and the grotesque cabinet of retards and knaves.
I do hope Ruth Kelly crosses the floor.
.......Ah, so you don't live here. Explains a lot: no doubt your view of the country is through a drip feed of the Mail and Telegraph. Do you not see the inh........
And so on in the usual nulabour cunt mode....I suppose that twat millibland is still about is he? Or are you just his tame dick licker?
Anonymous wrote in defence of "Pete" - Verty, in his "grey constricted world", he appears to have produced a better class of insult than your own pathetic attempt. Perhaps I'm not motivated by class hatred?
If you think the British economy is strong, you are an economic illiterate. Is that why interest rates keep going up? Two more rises predicted before the end of summer!
Zhu Min, the Bank of China's executive vice-president, said
"The global imbalances are becoming more concentrated, not less," he said. While China is adding to its colossal reserves at a rate of $200bn (£102bn) a year, five countries, led by the US and Britain, now account for 84pc of the $1,000bn of trade deficits in the global system.
Phil (your secret's out now!)
When you see me make a comment on the states, you may throw that comment at me - until then, wind your neck in.
Whatever happens to the economy in the future, it has grown faster, stronger and for longer under Gordon Brown than at any other time in British history. That is a fact. Economic predictions are about as much use as your facile observations on Britain - not much.
And the chances of Ruth Kelly crossing the floor are about the same as Guido getting a seat in cabinet. And then shagging you to celebrate.
Pete: Whatever happens to the economy in the future, it has grown faster, stronger and for longer under Gordon Brown
Ha ha, you are a LuLab Troll and I claim my £5.
Verity (if you insist in retaining your pseudonym)
I'm not motivated by any hatred - small minded, petty, ill-informed views such as yours get my goat that's all.
anonymous 7.36 - take a deep breath and try again.
voyager - long term debt is a problem. But my previous comment stands.
pete - the British economy is on the verge of collapse under the inept,chippy stewardship of the creepy Gordon Brown.
Voyager, thanks for those figures.
And it would not surprise me if Ruth Kelly crossed the floor. She is a conservative at heart.
pete
if you were to scrape together a few credit card apps and fill them in correctly you could have 100k in your hand within a month, then piss the lot up the wall in a week and have a pretty nice time, then you either have to pay the cash back or go buts, this is in effect what this government has done, if you are under 40 and relying on the state to look after you in future years I am pleased to say that you are about to get royally fucked (not in the way you like) serves you right for voting Labour.
And Pete if you are so bothered about the sensibilities of others why all the hatred focussed upon a lady you have never met?
If you want to trade insults try me
Phil
Is that "on the verge of a collapse" as it was
in 2001
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=15194
or 2002
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=35334&speeches=1
or 2003
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=51156
or 2004
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=115846
or 2005
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=125900
or last year
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=130124
or is it a completely different collapse?
BTW I realise I am very lucky to have all you economics professors at my fingertips...
peter h
When did I say I was worried about the sensibilities of others? Don't mistake hatred for contempt.
The analogy of credit cards is pretty facile, but that's not to say it wont come true. I'm no economics professor, but I'm willing to bet that you aren't either. After ten years of Tories saying that Labour are on the verge of recession (my post above), you'll excuse me if I don't take it that seriously.
And the point you make about pensions etc is true of every developed country pretty much without exception, and has nothing to do with Brown.
And if you want an insult, be my guest fuckface.
pensions brown raided them to the tune of 5 billion a year fuck other countries.
Fuck the conservative party they are also fuckwits , we have them to thank for our lack of a manufacturing base, the real crunch will come when the dollar loses its reserve status , boy are we in for trouble.
peter h
What is the relevance of the dollar reserve? (Excuse my ignorance - I told you I wasn't an economics professor)
pete
the dollar is known as the currency of reserve, as in a paper has intrinsic value in itself just as gold does, that is why all commodities are priced in dollars, people accumulate dollar in the same way they accumulate gold i.e. they believe that they can exchange it for goods and services, unlike gold the dollar doesn't make good jewellery, so come the day when people realise that america (like ourselves) produces fuck all apart from fat people and co2 they are going to look at that dirty piece of paper and see it for what it is a piece of paper you wouldn't wipe your bottom with.
What has america (or the uk) got that china really wants?
we give them bits of paper and they give us dvd players, how long will that go on for?
You may also note that china is quietly buying up Africa, don't believe for one minute that they are doing it to help the poor african folk.
Im slightly pissed and watching CBB so i hope that made sense.
perfect sense. cheers.
PHitch - I too have noticed that China is buying up Africa, the richest land mass, in terms of natural resources, in the world.
This century is going to be dominated by China and India. The US (and the Anglosphere)will continue to be an engine of economic and military growth, but will divvy it up with China and India, both of which already have very powerful, well-disciplined militaries.
oh dear. the comment bores are out.
Guido , are you there?
verity
My money is on India (Hindi India)
Good set of moral values but still know how to have a good time.
And "thick of it" you know where the door is.
On the other hand you could say something entertaining rather than just bitching.
YOU CLOWN!
Verity said:
"...the moral judgement of a church..."
You mean the one that covers up sexual predations by its priests?
Guido, I'm confused. Who is this young Irish person with the halo? It doesn't look like Ruth Kelly, to judge by the picture of her you posted on this blog a few days ago.
David Chapell - And? I know nothing about sexual predations by RC priests because I'm not RC and am not interested in the micro, not being an obsessive.
I don't see how sexual predations by some priests translates into the attempted theft by spiteful lefties from hundreds of millions of RC's of their faith in God.
So that Tony and Gordon and Peter and all the rest of the roiling nest of Labour can feel good about themselves? Doesn't compute.
Come up with a more intelligent premise, there's a good lad.
Meant to say this much earlier. But that is a lovely story. Can't see that many Ps of any party doing this. Well done Ruth. But you should get a free transfer to another job as soon as you can. But please don't be the Portillo of your generation. Make sure you look after Bolton and make them love you as much as Fawkes does.
You have been busy Guido. It must have taken a while to find a flattering phot for this one. It goes to show that even Ruth scrubs up well on occasion. Or could it be that her normal phots reflect her life working with a bunch of deranged morons, as colleagues.
Two bits of righteousness in one week Guido! Must be a record, keep it up and your sure to go to heaven!