Alan Craig and the Gaystapo controversy
Yesterday morning I was alerted on Facebook to a blog post written by Alan Craig, entitled: Confronting The Gaystapo.
Many of us will be familiar with Alan as the head of the Christian Peoples Alliance and from his fierce opposition to the proposed ‘Olympic Mega-Mosque’. There’s even a website dedicated to this cause: MegaMosqueNoThanks
Anyway, it transpires that Alan’s blog piece was published in the Church of England Newspaper, and since the time I was notified of its existence, news of this has spread like wildfire.
Pink News have picked up on it, as well as the Guardian, and atheist websites such as the FreeThinker.
Much of the criticism revolves around the terminology used, especially the allusions to Nazism. The general tone of the piece is akin to a call to war.
Now, I don’t think any of this is particularly helpful and feel that the wording and tone of Alan’s piece is overboard, but I have seen exactly the same from the other side also.
Yesterday, for example, a minister within the Church of England – Lesley Fellows – lamented the fact that the Church of England have stated that they will not allow their buildings for the use of Civil Partnerships. Here’s Lesley’s concluding thoughts on this matter:
That comes as close to F Off as anything, as far as I’m concerned. And we wonder why folks think we are judgemental, immoral and irrelevant?
I wonder why we would issue such a statement that offers no hope of LGBT people being married in church? Is it because we are trying to kowtow to the Provinces who think LGBT people should be killed?
And so we have ourselves in a vicious circle on the LGBT issue.
The discourse becomes ever more polemic and aggressive on both sides; the trenches are dug, the weapons loaded, and ever more vitriol-tipped bullets are fired.
UPDATE: Judging by comments being received on the most recent Pink News Article on this issue, action is being advocated against Alan Craig and the Church of England Newspaper. Here is an example:
I have today made a formal complaint about Mr Craigs article, and the publication of it by The Church Newspaper as being an incitement to hatred and/or violence to the police.
I have contacted the newspaper to explain how offensive the article is, and that the editors tepid defense of being on holiday and that he would have managed the publication differently just doesnt wash.
I am also contacting the toothless wonder, the Press Complaints Commission and I would urge all PN readers who are offended and outraged by this to contact their local police, the PCC and the newspaper. The newspapers email is:
cen@churchnewspaper.comThe PCC is:
complaints@pcc.org.ukI hope there will be a considerable volume of emails to both. Don’t just assume others will do it. Join in!
UPDATE II: Alan Craig has now blogged on correspondence between himself and the acting editor of Pink News, which you can view on this link.
November 9th, 2011 at 11:40 am
I would just like to draw attention to the fact that the word ‘gaystapo’ was in fact coined by Johann Hari, who is gay himself, in his article in the Huffington Post a few years back, in which he says:
“The twisted truth is that gay men have been at the heart of every major fascist movement that ever was – including the gay-gassing, homo-cidal Third Reich. With the exception of Jean-Marie Le Pen, all the most high-profile fascists in Europe in the past thirty years have been gay.
Fascism isn’t something that happens out there, a nasty habit acquired by the straight boys. It is – in part, at least – a gay thing, and it’s time for non-fascist gay people to wake up and face the marching music.” – Johann Hari
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-strange-strange-story_b_136697.html
If anyone non-gay had written that article, they would have been crucified by the Guardian, Pink News and the Twitterati.
November 9th, 2011 at 12:30 pm
That’s a remarkable article, Jill. Of course, since it’s by Hari we can probably disregard it as a work of fantasy, but even so…
November 9th, 2011 at 5:46 pm
UPDATE: Judging by comments being received on the most recent Pink News Article on this issue, action is being advocated against Alan Craig and the Church of England Newspaper. Here is an example:
November 9th, 2011 at 6:38 pm
Alan Craig has now blogged on correspondence between himself and the acting editor of Pink News, which you can view on this link.
This one’s moving fast…
November 9th, 2011 at 7:06 pm
The use of the phrase ‘Gaystapo’ suggests that gay people have command of the structures of governance and are establishment themselves. This isn’t the case of what I see. Gay hate crime is rife, gay people have to watch their backs all the time and non-gay men have to be uber cautious about having male friends for fear of a gay whiff scandal (William Hague, as an example).
November 9th, 2011 at 8:03 pm
With respect to put Lesley’s concerns on the same footing with Alan’s misjudged tone is a rather unfair comparison. the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality bill would make it a capital punishment to commit “aggravated homosexuality” which is essentially to repeat offend. Other African countries have similar propositions, and there exists a real homophobia in those countries, so much so that the accusation that you might be gay could hand you to mob justice. Now, whether that means Anglicans in the UK kowtow or not, its a marked contrast to the freedom Christians have in this country. A little perspective here is in order.
November 9th, 2011 at 8:29 pm
I think what concerned me most in Lesley’s comment, was the inference that the Church of England in the UK, would bow down to demands made by those that espouse murder of LGBT members, in their nations.
I think this is an insidious link to make and has no basis in reality.
There are still many in the CofE that hold to the Christian teaching that the sacrament of marraige is between one man and one woman, and they don’t wish to see the CofE used as a platform for something many still consider as ‘outside of the natural order’..
Many of us are aware and digusted at the actions of these rogue nations, and to pin a decision in the UK, based on the want to appease these practices, is vile and polemic.
November 10th, 2011 at 12:50 am
Alan Craig’s article is disgusting. I wonder what planet he is on! When resort to attacking gay civil rights as “Nazi”, you’ve lost before you begun.
November 10th, 2011 at 9:55 am
webmaster, agreed it is a highly political comment which does not bear truth, but the footing is different and with respect to PR, is a much better argument than Alan’s.
November 10th, 2011 at 2:47 pm
Webmaster,
First of all, to say that someone who does not fit the religious criteria of a church can not marry in a CofE church is perfectly right and just. However, the CofE official website states that “You’re welcome to marry in church whatever your beliefs, whether or not you are christened and whether or not you regularly go to church.” which means that exclusion from marriage in the church is NOT on religious grounds, and therefore, to exclude someone from marriage on the basis of sexual orientation is, in this case, unjust. If straight couples could only marry someone in the CofE if you met religious requirements including membership to the church and an agreement on church values, than a prohibition on gay marriage would be, in my opinion and I believe the opinion of the law, a prohibition on a non-religiously sound ceremony.
In the current situation, however, the statement made by the CofE is discriminatory on no basis other than sexual orientation which is against equity laws.
As well, when Western countries such as England make decisions regarding homosexuality in both law and practice it influences the laws and practices of other countries. Whether it is intended to or not, it gives the perpetrators of legislation like the Kill the Gays Bill something to point at and say “See? Western countries agree with this. They think it is wrong just like we do, and we are only doing what makes sense towards gay people”. As a country which is supposed to espouse equality and mutual respect, allowing for discrimination based on sexual orientation allows other countries to say that you can be a ‘good’ country – successful, morally correct, and committed to equality – and still pass discriminatory legislation. Homosexuality is only one level that this happens on, but it happens way too often and to lethal consequences. While no one should suggest that the CofE condones the behaviour of these countries actively, by acting in this way they passively condone and practice homophobia.
Because, honestly, when you are devoutly religious and can not get married to your partner because of your respective sexes, but someone who has no religious belief in the church and, in many cases, no personal reason for being married in that particular church can get married, the only differences the church cares about is what body parts you have. That is unlawful and just plain hurtful.
I think as well that Lesley was concerned with the fact that the CofE is sending a message to its many gay parishioners that they are unwelcome in the churches. She talks about the image that sends to the LGBTQ community, and the community at large. This image of being bigoted, hurtful, and judgmental is something that the religious community at large tries to disprove. Statements like that of the CofE regarding civil partnerships do just the opposite, and she was simply pointing that out.