Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Yeah, about that "civility" thing ...


In railing on about teh "homosexual agenda," the Blogging Tories' Darcey decides to raise the level of discourse in a decidedly non-workplace-safe way.

In other news, I'm already getting ideas for an accompanying graphic for my next piece on Catholic priests ...

10 comments:

Southern Quebec said...

Makes you wonder how many pictures Darcey looked at to get to that one, eh?

Dr.Dawg said...

In other news, I'm already getting ideas for an accompanying graphic for my next piece on Catholic priests ...

Why not use the same one? :)

Zorpheous said...

I ain't touch that one with a ten foot pole.

toujoursdan said...

They must be getting desperate if they have to pick a photo from the Folsom Street Fair (a leather/bondage festival for BOTH gays and straights) to illustrate their point.

Ti-Guy said...

From the pictures I've seen of Darcey, I wouldn't be surprised if he's one the guys in that photo.

*bleah*...

Anyway, I can't plow through whatever gay-themed issue got the beer-soaked redneck all discombobulated to start posting amateur porn...anyone care to give a capsule commentary?

toujoursdan said...

It's hard to say. First of all I take nearly anything in the Telegraph with a grain of salt, but evidently a Council in the United Kingdom is removing a foster child from a fundamentalist Christian family because they refused to sign a consent to the new Sexual Orientation Regulations.

According to the article they say that they are being "forced" to "promote" homosexuality by allowing the child access to pro-gay literature, associations, etc. which goes against their religious beliefs.

Another example of the big bad Homosexual Agenda (tm) at work. As if you can get a bunch of gay people to agree on anything.

C.J. said...

"...a Council in the United Kingdom is removing a foster child from a fundamentalist Christian family because they refused to sign a consent to the new Sexual Orientation Regulations.

According to the article they say that they are being "forced" to "promote" homosexuality by allowing the child access to pro-gay literature, associations, etc. which goes against their religious beliefs."


And if the child ends up in a non-fundamentalist, non-Christian home will the same council rule the child should be removed if there's no Bible, or Koran, or Torah, or whatever in the new home?

I think it's odd how tolerance seems to cut one way in these situations.

Ti-Guy said...

Well, I re-read the thing, and it's probably an hysterical reaction to equality legislation that, at its core, prohibits foster parents from brutalising their charges with regard to sexual orientation.

I don't think there's any obligation to promote, just a requirement *not* to condemn. Then again, this is Britain...a state that prohibited teachers from portraying homosexuality in a positive light during the Thatcher (*ptui*) years.

Hey, if you don't like what the State says, stop taking in foster kids.

orc said...

And it's not as if the UK is forcing the fundies to subscribe to The Advocate, Out, or the UK-equivalent of those magazine. All they're demanding is that the foster house doesn't restrict access.

I'd certainly expect that an atheist household would be kept to the same standards if their foster sprog wanted to bring home a piece of fiction like the Bible.

toujoursdan said...

And if the child ends up in a non-fundamentalist, non-Christian home will the same council rule the child should be removed if there's no Bible, or Koran, or Torah, or whatever in the new home?

Nice bait and switch. They aren't required to keep pro-gay literature in the home but they can't keep the child from accessing it. They aren't allowed to keep a child from accessing holy books either.