Fri 19th Sep 2014 | Last updated: Fri 19th Sep 2014 at 09:33am

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo
Hot Topics

Comment & Blogs

I have duly boycotted Tesco over ‘Pride Day’; but I have an uneasy feeling that its board are laughing all the way to the Tesco bank

Tesco’s still give over £60m a year to charity: so why don’t they just say so?

By on Wednesday, 23 November 2011

Early this month, Francis Phillips, in her Catholic Herald blog, scored something of a bull’s eye, with a post in which she pointed out that Tesco had ended its support for a major cancer research event, but has instead made a large contribution to London’s main annual gay pride event. Her blog was picked up by the Daily Mail in a strong piece on the subject:

Outrage as Tesco backs gay festival… but drops support for cancer charity event

Tesco has triggered outrage by ending its support for the Cancer Research ‘Race for Life’ while deciding to sponsor Britain’s largest gay festival.

Some religious commentators and groups have condemned the decision and are calling for a boycott of the supermarket chain.

Tesco has worked with Cancer Research for more than ten years, raising hundreds of millions of pounds to help combat an illness that will affect one in three of the population…

The chain’s main contribution was support for the annual fundraising Race for Life, the UK’s largest women-only charity event, which has raised more than £400million for the fight against cancer since it began in 1994. But shortly after Tesco announced the partnership would end, the firm said it would be a headline sponsor of Pride London…

Francis Phillips, a commentator at The Catholic Herald, condemned the shift, saying: “Tesco is a supermarket.

“Its remit has been to sell good-quality food and other items at very reasonable prices, and in this it has been hugely successful.

“Why has it now aligned itself with an aggressive political organisation such as Pride London? Why has it given up its sponsorship of Cancer Research? Or at least…why hasn’t it taken up with another mainstream charity such as the British Legion or Age UK?

“….They are a fundamental part of the fabric of our society – the kind of fabric that Tesco should be reflecting.”

Well, no doubt like many who read Francis’s blog, I decided that I would respond to it, in my case by reluctantly removing my custom from Tesco (reluctantly because their online delivery service really is quite excellent, and I got used to it, and pally with the delivery men and so on). This morning, in fact, my first delivery from Sainsbury’s will be arriving. What puzzled me about this story was the simple question of why Tesco’s was doing this? It seemed like such an obvious own goal. The sums involved, for instance, are quite disproportionate. In fact, if you go to Tesco’s website, then click on “corporate responsibility”, you will see that actually, though they have ended their sponsorship of the Race for Life event after ten years, they still give a very large amount every year to charitable causes, far more than they are giving to the London Pride day:

Corporate giving Each year, we set ourselves a target to donate at least 1% of our pre-tax profits to charities and good causes. This year we donated £64.3 million to charities and good causes through direct donations, cause-related marketing, gifts in kind, staff time and management costs. This represents 1.8% of our pre-tax profits – almost double our target. Emergency relief and humanitarian aid We work hard to respond quickly to natural disasters wherever they happen. Our partnership with the Red Cross has helped us to get funds to those in acute need. This year, our emergency giving included donations to help the victims of floods in Central Europe and the Qinghai earthquake in China, as well as floods in Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam.

Now, what’s interesting about all this is the way Tesco’s have handled this latest furore. In fact, they didn’t (as you might think from the Mail), just switch from normal charitable giving to support for Gay Pride. They’ve ended their “headline support” support for a particular fund-raising event, the “Run for Life” and around the same time announced their support for the Pride day. But there’s been no actual switch from one to the other. It just looks like that. So why don’t they say so more convincingly?

They seem to have a ready defence: that their charitable giving has not been actually diminished at all. They could even have protested, in the face of Catholic attacks, that they are still major donors to a major third world charity founded by Catholics, Mary’s Meals (yes, it’s that Mary), which feeds about half a million third world children a day: as they point out on their website, Tesco “began supporting Mary’s Meals, an international charity providing meals for schoolchildren, through the Tesco Charity Trust in 2009. Tesco’s support provides meals for over 4,000 schoolchildren in India, Kenya, Malawi and Thailand every year.”

So. There’s the question: why don’t they defend themselves, as they so easily could? Francis Philips’s question remains unanswered: “Tesco is a supermarket; its remit has been to sell good-quality food and other items at very reasonable prices, and in this it has been hugely successful. Why has it now aligned itself with an aggressive political organisation such as Pride London?”

Well, there’s a simple answer to that. They are absolutely delighted by this furore. They want to be thought aggressively pro-gay, if necessary at the expense of their well-deserved reputation for chaitable giving. Firstly because there’s money in it: the pink pound is now a substantial economic factor in these things, just as in London the pink vote has to be courted by politicians seeking election; you can be quite sure that Mayor Boris will be present and marching on London’s Pride day, as he was last year. I suspect he grits his teeth while he’s doing it, but he will be there all the same.

But another factor, quite simply, is that the gay and proud of it movement is well established within Tesco’s itself, in a way which isn’t true of other supermarket chains, so far as I can see (though I am open to correction). Have a look at this, the website of “Out at Tesco: supporting our Lesbian, Gay and Transgender staff”.

This is supported, we learn, by two very senior Tesco executives, Andrew Higginson, Chief Executive of Retailing Services, Chairman of Tesco Bank and a non-executive Director of BskyB, a very big cheese indeed. And here’s another: Benny Higgins, Chief Executive Officer of Tesco Bank, who, we are told, was chief executive of retail banking at RBS between 1997 and 2005, where he led the integration of NatWest retail. Both these are members of the main board of Tesco. So that question of Francis’s may have its answer: Why, she asks, has Tesco’s now aligned itself “with an aggressive political organisation such as Pride London”? Answers, as they used to say, on one side of a postcard.

The fact is that annoying the Catholics is a very clever thing to do, if getting the support of the gay lobby is what you want. I bet you anything that Tesco’s are delighted at the furore this comparatively inexpensive gesture has stirred up, and that they will do nothing to calm it down. So where does that leave US? Do we simply ignore their almost certainly deliberately provocative act: or do we boycott them, as I have so far done, almost certainly to very little effect? Either way, I have an uneasy feeling that there are those within Tesco’s who are presently laughing all the way to the Tesco bank.

  • http://www.catholictruthscotland.com EditorCT

    Well make sure you report Peter Tatchell to the police as well because he openly advocates child-adult sexual relationships (paedophilia) and wants the age of consent lowered to 14 -this,  the same hypocrite who held up banners protesting the Pope’s visit on grounds of clergy child abuse, has spoken of 
    the “positive nature of some child-adult sexual relationships” and even said he knew cases of nine-year-olds for whom sex with adults “gave them great joy”.http://www.christian.org.uk/news/tatchell-reiterates-call-for-lower-age-of-consent/
    Name any religious order or diocese that has in any way promoted paedophilia? Most of the cases have, in fact, been pederast cases – homosexual (obviously) priest with teenage boy.  Orders and dioceses have certainly been guilty of covering up these scandals and not acting to inform the police out of a misplaced concern about causing scandal, but I’ve never known of any Order or Diocese which held the view of Peter Tatchell, leading “gay” rights activist, that paedophilia is a good thing.

    And let’s not even GO where the researchers have been to work out if there is a link between homosexuality and child sex abuse. Let’s not even GO there.
    http://www.theinterim.com/2002/sept/02study.html

  • http://www.catholictruthscotland.com EditorCT

    Well, in your place I would be very slow to use a word in debate that I had to later check out in the dictionary.  In any case, St Paul teaches that we must be “fools for Christ” – what the world thinks of as “foolish” ain’t, as the song goes, necessarily so.

    Lock up “gays” in a large camp? Execute them en masse? Subject them to experiments to see if they can be cured?  Nope. I just wouldn’t make them predominant in every TV drama and I wouldn’t charge us lot with hate speech just because we continue to believe that abortion and homosexual activity are evil behaviours despite Godless politicians legalising them.

    That’s all, Sugar Plum.  

  • http://twitter.com/Acleron1 Acleron

    You mean you slept through the parliamentary and media debates about homosexuality? You slept through the changes in law about discrimination? You know nothing about the quite abhorrent treatment of homosexuals from Oscar Wilde to the national disgrace of the suicide of Alan Turing? Now that should amaze me, but strangely it doesn’t.

    And no, I haven’t had your experience of a drunken gay pride march. But then if people want to enjoy themselves, providing they don’t physically distress others in society, that makes me happy. If it causes you emotional distress you should question what circumstances of your own development has led you down that avenue. 

  • http://twitter.com/Acleron1 Acleron

    ^^^ Displacement activity

  • http://www.catholictruthscotland.com EditorCT

    “Distress”?  Have you visited any or many “gay” websites? Lock up your sons!

  • http://twitter.com/Acleron1 Acleron

    You really believe that homosexuals are out to get your offspring, how sad.

  • http://www.catholictruthscotland.com EditorCT

    Doesn’t matter what I believe – it’s what Peter Tatchell believes that is worrying.  Have you read any of his published statements? Have you read his book “Beyond Equality”?  If any Catholic priest had said any of the shocking things Tatchell has said about sex and children in that book, he’d have been hauled before the nearest hgh court judge. Discrimination? Homophobia? Don’t make me laugh.

  • AidanCoyle

    I’m starting to think that you’re a hilarious spoof of narrow-minded, intolerant Catholics, EditorCT. In the same way that Joe Orton created the character of Edna Welthorpe of Tunbridge Wells who was forever writing letters to the papers expressing her outrage at the latest Orton offering, I reckon there’s some gay man somewhere who’s having a whale of a time sounding off in the guise of EditorCT. Now who could you be? My money is on Alan Carr…

  • AidanCoyle

    As I scroll down EditorCT’s comments on this topic, I’m becoming increasingly convinced of what I said earlier: it IS Alan Carr…

  • http://twitter.com/Acleron1 Acleron

    Tatchell wants freedom and change, very threatening ideas to some people. 

    But as for his ideas about children:-

    ‘I do not support adults having sex with children.’  http://www.petertatchell.net/lgbt_rights/age_of_consent/index.htm

    I can see how that might be worrying.

  • Duncan Hill

    It’s interesting how those who are most outspoken against gay people are so often the most likely to defend the abusers in the church. (Not to mention the most likely to cite discredited “research” in their attacks on gay people). I often wonder what you have to hide. 

    Tesco have been sponsoring Pride for several years. It’s just that right now some churches are looking for ways to distract attention from their own corrupt practices so choose to attack a minority (gay people).

    Very sad – especially when I think of my Catholic friends, both gay and straight, who are ashamed of the bullying, the lies, and the hatred promoted in the name of the religion which means so much to them.

  • geoffreysmith1

    Would you care to name ONE of those orders, schools or dioceses “which have been such enthusiastic promoters of sexual abuse of children?
    I stress the word ‘enthusiastic’, because there is not a single one that you can name that justifies this slander. 

  • http://www.catholictruthscotland.com EditorCT

    Please do not misrepresent me. I am not “outspoken against gay people” but against the unnatural sexual practices of certain groups, including the sexual deviance of homosexuality.  Excuse me for being blunt but the day is fast approaching when saying what I’ve just said/written will land me in prison – tolerance of their critics is NOT a hallmark of the often less than cheerful “gay” community and their political pals in Paliaments north and south of the border.  I have met very pleasant, friendly and kind “gay” men – but I’ve also met very pleasant, friend and kind convicted criminals (oh yes, I move in a very wide circle, my wonders to perform.)  Doesn’t mean I condone their sexual or criminal deviancy respectively.

    And stop trying to equate the lamentable (of course) minority of Catholics, both priest and lay, who have shockingly indulged in the abuse of young people – clearly a homosexual issue in the priesthood – with the normalising of homosexual behaviour as a lifestyle choice.  No comparison, any more than an OAP tempted to do a bit of shoplifting compares with the Great Train Robbers.  Get a grip.

  • Jprholmes

    Well obviously i wasn’t looking it up for my own benefit. I don’t think you could legitimately say that homosexuals are “predominant” in every TV drama, what are you basing this on? They may be there but unless you’re watching a TV drama actually aimed at the homosexual community the predominant representation is of male female couples. One wonders whether you actually legitimately have these views or are just some kind of troll, probably with repressed homosexual feelings.
    Oh and are you saying Sugar Plum is your name or trying to call everyone who disagrees with you that? It’s quite embarrasing. Did you pick it up when last visited a gay bar?

  • http://www.catholictruthscotland.com EditorCT

    So you’ve no problem with Peter Tatchell’s views on child-adult sex? And have you read his book Beyond Equality?
    http://www.petertatchell.net/lgbt_rights/equality_not_enough/beyond_equality.htm

    This is no spoof, chum.  This is serious.

  • http://www.catholictruthscotland.com EditorCT

    Well, what about those former actors in Coronation Street who have fairly recently expressed concern about the predominance of homosexual characters in that drama. One of them asked the key question: “how many streets in the UK (I would add “or anywhere else, for that matter”) have a “gay” couple, a lesbian (teenage) couple, a transgender person and a transexual, all living shoulder to shoulder in the same street?”

    Despite the fact that they are a minority group, their predominance in the media speaks volumes about the determination of the powers-that-be in the broadcasting media and Parliament, to normalise homosexuality come hell or high water. 

    And I kind of resent the idea that only homosexuals express affection to their brothers and sisters in the human race; “Sugar Plum”, “Honey Bunch”, and “Darling”, are expressions of affection that have long been part of my vocabulary especially when debating. I find it helps me resist the temptation to call people rather less acceptable names – such as idiot, clown on no-brainer.

    OK Honeybunch?

  • geoffreysmith1

    You have only to witness the Folsom Street gay parade in San Francisco to realise what a horrible, depraved condition that of ‘gay’ homosexuality really is.  I have never heard or read of any ‘gay’ who has expressed any objection to, or revulsion against, this diabolical exhibition of evil.
    If you seriously think that the Catholic Church will eventually change her mind on this matter of homosexuality, and approve of such conduct, you are capable of believing just about anything.

  • geoffreysmith1

    If there is anything in this world that is a stone cold cert, it is that the Catholic Church will NEVER approve the sexual conduct of ‘gays’.  If you cannot accept that, then you have no business remaining in the Church, assuming you are a Catholic.

  • geoffreysmith1

    We Catholics do NOT discriminate against homosexuals.  We object most strongly to anyone using public money, or money obtained from the public, to promote and encourage the public display of a very great evil – ‘gay pride’ parades.
    There are many homosexuals who are aghast at the exhibition of such debauchery by their brethren in the fraternity, and who will have nothing to do with any aspect of this narcissism.
    Tesco have chosen to align themselves with a force for evil, and accordingly they must now expect to be opposed by all people who genuinely wish to be thought of as Christians.

  • Jprholmes

    Lol i’m sure there’s a street in Brighton or Soho somewhere. Don’t forget however that for the majority of that shows considerable run there was no representation whatsoever of LGBT (awful acronym i know) people. How many streets do you know where as many serial killers, violent deaths, marriage breakdowns etc. Its not meant to reflect reality. It’s just a drama. This also has nothing to do with William Oddie moaning about what Tesco decides to do with its money. If he carries on boycotting he might find he runs out of places to shop for all his pies and cakes that he so obviously enjoys eating.

  • schmenz

    What is interesting to me is how suddenly and almost completely, people have taken leave of their senses.  Imagine: supporting buggery, of all things.  It is almost like we are living through a John Wyndham story like “Day of the Triffids” where everyone on earth looks up gleefully at the light show in space, only to end up blind so that the triffids can take over.  In this case we have Lavendar Triffids who have apparently convinced many in Society that supporting a lifestyle that will bring them probable physical death and certain spiritual death is a good thing.

    I wonder if the bigwigs at Tesco read newspapers.  Are they unaware, perhaps, of what is happening in the Catholic Church, which is suffering from an infestation of homosexuals into its priesthood unprecedented in its entire 2,000 year history?  And what are the results of this infestation?  The buggering of adolescent boys, ruined lives, suicides, shame, corruption, probably murder, financial devastation, loss of the Faith, etc.  And Tesco thinks supporting these horrors is just great?  I do wonder sometimes what planet I am living on.

    I really don’t know what else explains this but some weird sort of collective insanity, or death wish, or both.  But if Tesco and others want to celebrate and give financial aid to one of the four mortal sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance they will no longer have my business, no matter what other goof charities they give to.  Perhaps dwindling profits will make them take a closer look at how they allocate charitable contributions (by the way, is sodomy a recognized charity now, or did I miss something?).

    Cancer research, si.  Poofery, no. 

  • geoffreysmith1

    “This is about a small minded and quite bigoted cult that according to
    the article’s author is having a hissy fit because Tesco appears to have
    different views.”

    A cult?  1.3 billion people?  Some cult!  You have lost touch with reality, Acleron.

  • geoffreysmith1

    We now know where you are coming from.

  • geoffreysmith1

    There is no possibility of any of our doctrines or articles of faith ever being changed.
    I think you should stress this point in your comments, nytor. (Matt. 28:20)
    Any one who believes that we can change our articles of faith is seriously deluded.

  • geoffreysmith1

    Well said, schmenz!  I agree absolutely with your refreshing common sense.

  • geoffreysmith1

    “I rarely go to Tesco s anyway.They are into world domination.”

    They certainly are with Warren Buffett as a shareholder.

  • geoffreysmith1

    Whether the representation of LGBT people on TV is ubiquitous or once in a blue moon is totally irrelevant.  What we Christians object to is the portrayal of such unfortunates as being in any way ‘normal’ or ‘acceptable’ or even ‘natural’.
    We demand that such a characterisation must always show them for what they really are: perpetrators of a gravely immoral sexual behaviour, one that will undermine the health and moral probity of society.

  • http://twitter.com/Acleron1 Acleron

    Tatchell has plainly stated that he does not agree with child-adult sex. That was in the link I provided for you. How you have a problem with that is puzzling.

    The link you gave, outlines an agenda that is 16 years old. Nothing in that particularly bothers me although I don’t agree with 100% of it. It certainly doesn’t state, as you imply, that he advocates child-adult sex. It is refreshingly explicit in saying what he thinks and what he wants. It’s gratifying that a lot of it has come true in such a short time. 

    He does, however, make a telling argument. Without bigots, his strident form of political attack would not be necessary and would likely cease to exist. I totally agree with that sentiment. Without people who try to enforce their own illogical beliefs and bizarre morals on others, the world would be a more pleasant and certainly safer place. But of course, while we still have groups of society who are indoctrinated from early childhood to think they are Right!, this utopia will be in the far future. But if a few more of the religious start to question the hypocrisy that is fed to them and realise there is a much more beautiful aspect to human society I can still hope.

  • Jackie

    I wonder just how many of those 1.3 billion catholics on the plant are practising? I also wonder just how many of those who are practising are supportive of boycotting Tesco’s because they are sponsoring gay pride? I would surmise the answer to be not a lot.

  • http://www.catholictruthscotland.com EditorCT

    The link you included led to an error page.  But if Peter Tatchell is speaking with forked tongue on this, who can blame him? Here’s what he said in “Teaching Sex – What Should Schools Teach Children”…  (I’ll omit the first paragraph where he applauds an end to sex education which was “overwhelmingly biased towards promoting heterosexuality … etc)  He goes on…

    “Nothing must be off limits… Sex education, to be effective, needs to start at a very early age, beginning gently in the first year of primary school and gradually becoming more detailed and explicit at secondary level… The best way to persuade teenagers to adopt oral sex and mutual masturbation is by making them look and sound sexy.”

    Of course, to someone who thinks nothing of Tatchell’s approval of sexually active nine-year olds, which I quoted verbatim in another post, this will seem very tame.

    You are one of the few “gays” I’ve come across who shys clear of admitting what is widely known – that homosexuals are drawn to children.  The homosexual Guru Alfred Kinsay was very open about that, so I don’t know why you are apparently trying to deny it.

  • Anonymous

    The prurient interest shown by some contributors to this thread in the private activities of other people is quite disturbing. The sooner all members of the Church, whether Pope, priest or layperson, decide that what consenting adults do in their bedrooms is none of our business the better. Can anyone reading the Gospels imagine Jesus being bothered in the slightest about the way in which two people expressed their love for each other?

  • Jackie

    You are quite correct in your assertion that we catholics do not discriminate against our homosexual brothers and sisters most of us have more sense than to discriminate against people who are after all the way god made them.

  • Lizabeth

    I have written to Tesco P.L.C  asking why the Gay Pride Parade through London (and elsewhere) can be considered a Charity ? 
    The participants are neither, lame, blind, deaf, dumb, maimed in warfare fighting for their country, neither are they a voluntary organisation manning Lifeboats, Air- Ambulances, or Mountain Rescue Teams. If they were, then they would be a recognised Charity which seeks to serve EVERYBODY, and not a small percentage of the population intent on enjoying themselves in a Street Party Parade in  London. Their vociferous Political leaders are extremely wealthy people who certainly have no NEED for the financial support which (truthfully) has been initially extracted from Tesco’s customers.

    Which again begs the question – Why does Tesco finance this Street Party Parade ???

    Incidentally, Tesco have lowered the Discount on their Loyalty Cards from 2% to 1 %.

  • geoffreysmith1

    “The prurient interest shown by some contributors to this thread in the private activities of other people is quite disturbing.”

    Maybe to you, but not to anyone who is concerned with the moral well-being of our country.  Sexual misconduct is only one facet of “the private activities of other people” that worries all law-abiding citizens.

    “The sooner all members of the Church, whether Pope, priest or
    layperson, decide that what consenting adults do in their bedrooms is
    none of our business the better.”

    What consenting adults do, in or out of their bedrooms, is very much the Church’s business.  It is all part and parcel of the mandate given to her by Christ; to preach His gospel to all creatures and nations.

    “Can anyone reading the Gospels imagine Jesus being bothered in the
    slightest about the way in which two people expressed their love for
    each other?”

    I should imagine that Our Lord, condemning adultery and ‘remarriage’ after divorce,
    would not hesitate to condemn a practice that violated the very reason why sex was divinely ordained in the first place – to procreate and increase the human race.

  • Anonymous

    I wasn’t really aware of Mary’s Meals before this so I had a look at their website (http://www.marysmeals.org.uk). To be honest, seeing that Dr Oddie clearly thinks highly of them and knowing his reactionary views I wasn’t sure what to expect but I was clearly being prejudiced: it appears to be an excellent and very worthwhile organisation.

    I noticed in particular their concern for climate change (search for ‘climate change’ on their website). For example:

    “The children who attend this school are the children of pastoralist nomads whose lifestyle and livelihoods are being systematically destroyed by climate change.” (http://www.marysmeals.org.uk/east-africa-emergency-appeal/stories-from-east-africa/)

    Since Dr Oddie refuses to believe scientists and politicians when they speak of the dangers of climate change, perhaps he will listen to Mary’s Meals?

  • geoffreysmith1

    “I would surmise the answer to be not a lot.”

    In your opinion.

  • Anonymous

    This is a disgraceful comment. I’m sure it is obvious and schmenz is deliberately trying to cause trouble, but I’ll spell it out anyway. Being homosexual does not mean being paedophile. I am so angry I’d better not say anything more.

    (I see now this – the supposed link between homosexuality and paedophilia – has been discussed in another thread in these comments.)

  • geoffreysmith1

    I would have thought it was obvious that God did not make homosexuals because there is no such thing as a ‘gay’ gene in the human genome.  If God had made homosexuals, He would be contradicting Himself, because He commanded our first parents ‘to increase and multiply and fill the earth.  That is why He created our sexual faculty, and the reason for its existence.
    No, the cause of homosexuality lies in the childhood environment.  For reasons not yet properly understood, there are influences at that time that distort the natural sexual development of the individual and produce the objectively disordered condition of homosexuality.  It is certainly not in accordance with the divine will, and was not ‘made’ by God.

  • http://twitter.com/Acleron1 Acleron

    Link works for me, must be your browser. 

    So we have established that Tatchell does not support or approve of Adult-child sex. Good, glad we agree on at least that. 

    Now, I have reservations about the text you presented. Perhaps that is because I’m of an age that thinks kids should be brought up as I was, although intellectually I know that is impossible. But that is his opinion, openly stated and available for discussion. Is he going to now rush off and kidnap children to indoctrinate them in his belief?

     ‘Homosexuals are drawn to children and this is widely known.’???

    My first thought was that you really should go out more often. This is such obvious nonsense I am mildly surprised (not much these days) that you voiced such an opinion, you must have been laughed at before. Do you have any evidence, not opinions but real data?

    As to my sexual orientation, I don’t quite see what it has to do with this discussion. As it happens, you are again laughably incorrect.

  • http://www.catholictruthscotland.com EditorCT

    Nothing wrong with my browser.  If you like you can reinstate the link for me to double-check. But I do not see how Tatchell’s well publicised pursuit of lower the age of consent to 14 and his remarks about nine year old can possibly lead anyone to think that he is anything but supportive of adult-child relationships (consenting children, of course…)

    Yes, there is plenty of evidence about the link between homosexuality and children (I’ve already cited Alfred Kinsey) but – don’t laugh – since I am going to be out all day tomorrow I won’t be able to (or will be unlikely to have the time to) dig out some links for you.  Get Googling!

    Listen, pal. In your shoes, being mistaken for a “gay” due to your hostile response to each and every criticism of that “lifestyle”, I’d be taking another look at myself. And I certainly wouldn’t be laughing…

    Luv ‘n stuff.

  • Jprholmes

    “Some christians” not “we christians”. I could explore in more detail about why what you wrote is irrational but it would be a waste of time. For what its worth i’m inclined to agree with the author of this article that it is not right that Tesco have removed funding for a charity in favor of a pressure group. I do however object to him effectively using the plight of a cancer charity as a vehicle to launch another tiresome attack on homosexuals. His opinion on the matter is insignificant, as is everyones. I pray that love will prevail in the end and that the preachers of hate will become yet further isolated. I shall follow the example of Dr Fatso cake face and boycott the catholic herald.

  • Charles Martel

    Well put, schmenz. Things that were regarded as insane 50 years ago have now been completely normalised. A massive amount of brainwashing has been going on. What’s sinister is how easily people have succumbed – even Catholics. I was called an ‘extremist’ this summer by my own Catholic sister for advocating the re-criminalisation of abortion and dating to criticise the great saint of our age, Barack Obama. My Catholic brother, a pillar of his parish, holds that abortion should be legal (though he personally disagrees with it!). When I dare to point out what the Church has always taught, they look right through me with a pitying stare. I think I am now the only one in my family who regards homosexual acts as depraved. For most people now, it seems, sodomy is simply splendid; buggery is beautiful (‘though I personally wouldn’t do it’)….

  • David Armitage

    It’s good to know that in these days of press freedom menaced by the PCA hate rants can still find a warm place in the sun. Last week we had threats of petrol bombs and brick because of a jokie ad, but this stirring up of hatred merits prosecution. While we’re waiting lets whistle a gay tune:
    London Pride has been handed down to us,London Pride is a flower that’s free.London Pride means our own dear town to us,
    And our pride is forever will be.
       It got us through the blitz after all! Is Alf Garnett up for canonisation?

  • http://twitter.com/Acleron1 Acleron

    The definition of a cult doesn’t depend on numbers. What essential difference between the catholic church and a cult can you define?

  • http://twitter.com/Acleron1 Acleron

    The link again is 

    http://www.petertatchell.net/lgbt_rights/age_of_consent/index.htm

    It is a very clear statement that your conclusion of Tachell’s beliefs are flat wrong.

    You have made a startling declaration that applies to all homosexuals and all you can provide for proof is one person’s opinion. I suspect that you have latched onto that statement to reinforce your own prejudice, just as have you misconstrued Tatchell’s statements about the age of consent while disregarding his unambiguous statement.

    Sorry but you make the claim, you back it up with evidence such as unbiased surveys carried out with comparison groups etc. Otherwise, all you have is your prejudice.

  • Arthurleek

    could it be estrogen in the water supply?

  • Pingback: Antonietta