on the Not Ashamed bollox

December 1st, 2010 § 2 comments

I apologise in advance, but this post may not be very intelligent, intelligable or of any merit at all, but these guys can just fuck right off.

Teh fucking Christian loons have crawled out the woodwork and are screaming about their slowly eroding privilege with a campaign called Not Ashamed. I’m fucked if I know why they chose fucking December for this fucking thing. It’s not like there fuck all else going on this month to promote being a Jesusist.

Christians who believe their faith is “under attack” in Britain have launched a “Not Ashamed Day” campaign.

I read that as…

Delusional, paranoid cunts put their head above the parapet.

And you’ve got to be at least slightly delusional to be able to say…

… I do not any longer see a level playing field in our society,

…with a straight face when you were dismissed from your job for being a religion induced bigot.

Former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey claimed Christians of “deep faith” faced discrimination.

“Deep faith”? What the fuck is ‘Deep faith’? Sounds like a euphemism for ‘extremists’, to me. Either way they’re wrong. They don’t face discrimination. Ridicule and robust arguement, yes. Discrimination? No. Funnily enough, I would use the same examples to make my point as do these ‘deep faithed’ christians…

Their campaign highlights a series of cases involving Christians who have lost claims for discrimination.

They include Nadia Eweida – a British Airways worker from London – and Shirley Chaplin – an NHS nurse from Kenn, Exeter – who both lost high-profile discrimination claims over wearing crosses at work.

And Gary McFarlane, a Christian marriage guidance counsellor from Bristol, lost a court bid earlier this year to challenge his sacking for refusing to give sex therapy to homosexuals.

See? All three of the cases these fuckwits use as examples of discrimination are *not* cases of discrimination. What did Lord Carey do with regard to the last case? He only called for a load of judges to sit on the appeal that had “proven sensitivity and understanding of religious issues”. That, to me, is code for ‘the judges didn’t understand the special logic needed to be understood on matters of faith’.

If you need special judges with a different understanding of logic to everyone else then that’s not much of a level playing field, is it?

When I first saw this article this morning it didn’t have the counter views. I especially like this one from another bunch of Christians…

The Christian think tank Ekklesia said that there was “no evidence” to back up the Not Ashamed campaign.

Co-Director Jonathan Batley said: “Since 2005, when we first predicted the growth in claims of ‘persecution’, we have been closely examining individual cases and what lies behind them [and] have found no evidence to back up the claim of the Not Ashamed campaign that Christians as a group are being systematically marginalised in Britain.

“We have found consistent evidence, however, of Christians misleading people and exaggerating what is really going on, as well as treating other Christians, those of other faith and those of no faith in discriminatory ways.”

Presumably Ekklesias’ members faith isn’t as ‘deep’ as those wankers from Christian Concern. Or is it that Ekklesia used the wrong type of logic?

Tagged , , , , ,

§ 2 Responses to on the Not Ashamed bollox"

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

What's this?

You are currently reading on the Not Ashamed bollox at Sim-O.