DETTERLING ALLEGES
GENE RESPONDS
Yes, Gene responds and kicks the aging tosser Detterling into touch.
- it is irrational to claim, for FOUR YEARS, that you have written a novel which is scheduled for publication - when in fact the "novel" in question is only three thousand words long and would only ever be published at the author's expense
YES, IT IS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLICATION.
JAMES JOYCE WAS IN MY OPINION AND IN THE OPINION OF MANY THE GREATEST WRITER SINCE SHAKESPEARE. IT TOOK HIM TEN YEARS TO GET HIS FIRST BOOK, DUBLINERS, PUBLISHED.
I HAVE CAMPAIGNED IN MANY WAYS - NOT JUST ON THIS BLOG ONLY.
TOTALY FALSE. THIS FALLACY IS PELAGIANISM. IN THE SECULAR AREA IS HAS BEEN TOTALLY DISMISSED BY ANTROPOLOGISTS. IN LITERATURE THE FALLACY OF THE 'NOBLE SAVAGE' HAS BEEN DISMISSED BY WRITERS AS DIVERSE AS WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE AND WILLIAM GOLDING.
I HAVE NEVER CLAIMED THAT. MANY HOMOSEXUALS, PACE, MY GREAT-UNCLE CLAUDE, ARE CHASTE AND CELIBATE.
- it is irrational to claim that there is a case to be made against homosexuality and the homosexual life style which is confirmed by the teachings of Christ Jesus, in whom we are all one...
JESUS CHRIST STRONGLY CONDEMENED FORNICATION. HOMOSEXUAL ACTS ARE THE MOST DEPRAVED FORM OF FORNICATION.
DETTERLING STATES
ReplyDeleteGENE PREVARICATES, BLUSTERS, BULLSHITS AND WAFFLES.
YET ANOTHER EPIC FAIL FOR GENE VINCENT, THE RUSSEL BRAND OF RATIONAL ARGUMENT.
"YES, IT IS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLICATION."
ReplyDeleteBy whom and when?
JAMES JOYCE WAS IN MY OPINION AND IN THE OPINION OF MANY THE GREATEST WRITER SINCE SHAKESPEARE. IT TOOK HIM TEN YEARS TO GET HIS FIRST BOOK, DUBLINERS, PUBLISHED.
So that fact is supposed to justify your calling yourself a "professional full time writer" is it? Dear GOD.
TOTALY FALSE. THIS FALLACY IS PELAGIANISM.
Pelagianism is nonsense; demonstrate to us the fallacy that underlies it.
No, thought not.
IN THE SECULAR AREA IS HAS BEEN TOTALLY DISMISSED BY ANTROPOLOGISTS.
What has been dismissed, exactly?
How?
By whom?
IN LITERATURE THE FALLACY OF THE 'NOBLE SAVAGE' HAS BEEN DISMISSED BY WRITERS AS DIVERSE AS WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE AND WILLIAM GOLDING.
What has the "fallacy of the noble savage" got to do with homosexuality? For fuck's sake, Gene.
I HAVE NEVER CLAIMED THAT. MANY HOMOSEXUALS, PACE, MY GREAT-UNCLE CLAUDE, ARE CHASTE AND CELIBATE.
You have no evidence at all to substantiate the claim that your Uncle Nancy was chaste and celibate. For all you know he was one of the most notorious buggers in London, up there with Guy Burgess, Anthony Blunt, Lord Montague of Beaulieu, Louis Mountbatten and James Dean.
JESUS CHRIST STRONGLY CONDEMENED FORNICATION. HOMOSEXUAL ACTS ARE THE MOST DEPRAVED FORM OF FORNICATION.
That is your opinion. Let;s have your evidenced proof of this. Perhaps start by demonstrating to us how depravity is measured. How depraved is it, for example, to bugger someone else's wife?
GENE, STOP EMBARRASSING YOURSELF.
AND ONCE MORE, REFLECT HOW YOUR BLOG HAS BEEN HIJACKED.
YOU ARE NOT SETTING THE AGENDA ANY MORE:
I AM.
Gene "Two-faced crybaby Cockney ponce" Vincent, you have been defeated once again.
And while you are at it, explain how legal sexual relations can be depraved.
ReplyDeleteAll homosexual sexual relations have been legal since 1967, and since 2013, much homosexual sexual activity has taken place within marriages. Legal sexual activity between consenting adults within legal marriage cannot be depraved.
You may dislike and deplore both those facts, Gene, but you simply can’t define actions as “fornication” simply because you don’t approve of them.
And as far as I remember Christ had nothing to say about homosexuality.
Another epic fail for Gene “Struggling Fuckwit” Vincent.
Oh, and tell us about all the ways in which you have campaigned against homosexuality and abortion, other than republishing plagiarised articles by people who can actually write.
ReplyDeleteI suggest as a title for this post: “The day I got off my lazy arse and actually did something for a change”. Although at that the title would be longer than the article, I suppose.
What’s the matter, Gene “Two-faced Cry-baby” Vincent? Cat got your tongue?
ReplyDelete"Yes, Gene responds and kicks the aging tosser Detterling into touch."
ReplyDeleteNo he doesn't, because it is irrational to claim, for FOUR YEARS, that you have written a novel which is scheduled for publication - when in fact the "novel" in question is only three thousand words long and would only ever be published at the author's expense and reply only, shouting at the top of your voice for lack of anything else to do "YES, IT IS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLICATION."
If it is scheduled, tell us by whom and when?
Oh wait: you can't because it isn't.
"and since 2013, much homosexual sexual activity has taken place within marriages. Legal sexual activity between consenting adults within legal marriage cannot be depraved."
ReplyDeleteSame-sex marriage (sic) is no marriage in the sight of God. That is why your church, the C of E, will not allow its priests to enter into same sex marriage or minister such so-called 'marriages'. (sic).
The Catholic Church will of course never accept same sex marriage (sic).
Sexual activity between same-sex couples is fornication of the worst variety - giving the name marriage to same-sex unions makes no difference here. Such sexually activity is an appalling sin. Jesus totally condemned fornication.
Defeated again Detterling!
"Defeated again Detterling!"
ReplyDeleteBalls - you are falling into your established demented delusion that your particularly bigoted interpretation of the mind of God is is somehow a universal FACT.
It is NOT: it is a BELIEF - a belief to which you are perfectly entitled, but which you are NOT entitled to shove down the throats [or even up the arses] of anyone else as if it were a FACT.
"Same-sex marriage (sic) is no marriage in the sight of God."
Again, you are entitled to believe that if you wish - but you are NOT entitled to state it as a FACT - for you to do that is for you to read the mind of God, you blasphemous bastard.
"That is why your church, the C of E, will not allow its priests to enter into same sex marriage"
Anglican priests have been allowed to enter same sex civil partnerships since 2005. Given that priests are now allowed to conduct the blessing of a same sex marriage, it can only be a matter of time before priests are allowed to contract a same sex marriage. And quite right too,to coin a phrase.
You are clutching at straws as usual, Gene.
"Sexual activity between same-sex couples is fornication of the worst variety."
Demonstrate this scripturally from first principles. You can't, because ONCE AGAIN you are falling into the error of thinking that your PISSY LITTLE OPINIONS are FACTS.
"Defeated again Detterling!"
No, Gene: it's just like the old days on TES Opinion, when you came out with bigoted crap which was then logically and forensically demolished, in reply to which you would simply repeat the original bigoted crap again and again until, in the teeth of commonsense and the evidence that had completely demolished your nonsense, you would claim victory.
You were a stupid, bigoted bastard then, and you still are.
"Given that priests are now allowed to conduct the blessing of a same sex marriage"
ReplyDeleteNO! NO! NO! Anglican priests are not allowed to bless same-sex marriages (sic).
You really have lost it Detterling!
https://www.churchofengland.org/life-events/your-church-wedding/just-engaged/information-same-sex-couples#:~:text=The%20law%20prevents%20ministers%20of,still%20support%20you%20with%20prayer.
No way out of this one Detterling! Oh! dear. Tee! Hee! Hee!
DeleteAs always, Gene, you are talking crap.
DeleteFrom the Church Times General Synod Digest, 17th February 2023.
"THE General Synod welcomed the Bishops’ proposals for providing prayers to bless same-sex couples in church on the Thursday — but with a last-minute proviso that their use would not contradict the Church’s current teaching on marriage.
Voting was: Bishops 36-4, with two recorded abstentions; Clergy 111-85, with three recorded abstentions; Laity 103-92, with five recorded abstentions."
From the Church of England website:
"The Church of England’s General Synod has welcomed proposals which would enable same-sex couples to come to church after a civil marriage or civil partnership to give thanks, dedicate their relationship to God and receive God’s blessing."
You are talking bollocks, Gene.
Another epic fail for Gene "Witless Pillock" Vincent.
And where are your reasoned theological responses to this devastating broadside?
Balls - you are falling into your established demented delusion that your particularly bigoted interpretation of the mind of God is is somehow a universal FACT.
It is NOT: it is a BELIEF - a belief to which you are perfectly entitled, but which you are NOT entitled to shove down the throats [or even up the arses] of anyone else as if it were a FACT.
"Same-sex marriage (sic) is no marriage in the sight of God."
Again, you are entitled to believe that if you wish - but you are NOT entitled to state it as a FACT - for you to do that is for you to read the mind of God, you blasphemous bastard.
"That is why your church, the C of E, will not allow its priests to enter into same sex marriage"
Anglican priests have been allowed to enter same sex civil partnerships since 2005. Given that priests are now allowed to conduct the blessing of a same sex marriage, it can only be a matter of time before priests are allowed to contract a same sex marriage. And quite right too,to coin a phrase.
You are clutching at straws as usual, Gene.
"Sexual activity between same-sex couples is fornication of the worst variety."
Demonstrate this scripturally from first principles. You can't, because ONCE AGAIN you are falling into the error of thinking that your PISSY LITTLE OPINIONS are FACTS.
"Defeated again Detterling!"
No, Gene: it's just like the old days on TES Opinion, when you came out with bigoted crap which was then logically and forensically demolished, in reply to which you would simply repeat the original bigoted crap again and again until, in the teeth of commonsense and the evidence that had completely demolished your nonsense, you would claim victory.
You were a stupid, bigoted bastard then, and you still are.
And finally, tell us by whom and when "Granny Barkes fell in Woolworths" is to be published?
Oh wait: you can't because it isn't going to be because it doesn't exist beyond a piffling 3000 words of unpublishable horseshit.
Ha! Ha! Ha! You take the biscuit Detterling. You could not have been more comprehensively defeated. CHURCH OF ENGLAND PRIESTS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BLESS SAME SEX MARRIAGES. It's there in black and white on the C of E website.
DeleteHa! Ha! Ha! No bluff and bluster can get you out of this one Detterling.
Shall I quote from the C of E website for you Detterling?
ReplyDelete"Church of England ministers can not carry out or bless same-sex marriages"
Ha! Ha! Ha! No bluff and bluster can get you out of this one Detterling.
Gene, this reminds me of the pitiful display you put on when the Same Sex Marriages Bill went to the Lords in 2013 - you were all over this blog saying that they would reject it, despite the fact that the Lords last were able to stop legislation in 1911. It was painful to watch, as is this.
ReplyDeleteThe Church of England website does indeed say that
"Church of England ministers can not carry out or bless same-sex marriages"
However, as this report from The Guardian of February 2023 makes clear, this ruling is in the process of being amended, as follows:
"Church of England votes in favour of blessings for same-sex unions
Passing of motion at General Synod represents profound shift in church’s stance on homosexuality
Harriet Sherwood Thu 9 Feb 2023 18.39 GMT
Church of England priests will be permitted to bless the civil marriages of same-sex couples in a profound shift in the church’s stance on homosexuality after a historic vote by its governing body.
The first blessings for gay couples could happen this summer.
Individual churches will be encouraged to state clearly whether they will offer blessings to avoid confusion and disappointment.
After an impassioned debate lasting more than eight hours, the C of E’s national assembly, the General Synod, voted by 250 votes to 181 to back a proposal by bishops intended to end years of painful divisions and disagreement over sexuality.
But emotionally charged speeches from those advocating full equality for LGBTQ+ Christians and those arguing that traditional biblical teaching on marriage and sex must be upheld signalled that the debate is set to continue.
The synod also agreed that the church will apologise for the harm it has caused to LGBTQ+ people. It welcomed a forthcoming review of a ban on clergy entering into same-sex civil marriages and a celibacy rule for clergy in same-sex relationships.
Conservatives narrowly succeeded in amending the motion to state that the church’s doctrine of marriage – that it is between a man and a woman – was unchanged. Although progressives were dismayed by the amendment, it may have encouraged some traditionalists to cast their votes in favour of the main motion.
Justin Welby, the archbishop of Canterbury, and Stephen Cottrell, the archbishop of York, said they hoped the decision marked a “new beginning” for the C of E, saying: “It has been a long road to get us to this point.”
The archbishops said: “For the first time, the C of E will publicly, unreservedly and joyfully welcome same-sex couples in church."
As I write this, draft liturgy for the blessing of same sex marriages has been published, and will be debated at the next General Synod in York next month; if it needs to be amended then it will be brought back to a further Synod in November this year. Either way, it is clear that
[a] the Church of England will be able and willing to bless the marriages of same sex couples by the beginning of 2024;
[b] there will be a review of the ban on clergy being allowed to enter same sex marriages, and on the celibacy rule for same-sex clergy couples.
The only reason that the ruling you have quoted is still in place on the C of E website is to avoid confusion whilst arrangements for its supercession and replacement are finalised.
Neither bluff, nor bluster, Gene, simple, hard fact.
Not for the first time, nor I am sure for the last, your crowing, sneering bigotry has been overtaken and overturned by events. And no doubt you will continue to crow and sneer that for the time being you are in the right.
Make the most of it, Gene: it won't last out the year. If you doubt this, have a look at the Anglican Church in Wales website. Prayers for the blessing of same sex marriages are already published and in use.
Yet another epic fail for Gene "Two-faced Fuckwit" Vincent, the Jeffrey Archer of Practical Theology.
"Neither bluff, nor bluster, Gene, simple, hard fact."
ReplyDeleteThe simple hard fact is that C of E priests cannot bless same-sex marriages (sic) contrary to what you wrote.
I have never encountered anyone so in denial as you. The facts stare you in the face yet you continue to argue that black is white.
I'm sure this is some form of psychosis.
Gene, don't make a bigger tit of yourself than you need to.
ReplyDeleteI AGREE that at this moment Church of England clergy cannot bless same sex marriages in church. But five minutes' research on the internet will tell you that this ruling is in the process of being changed, and that before the end of this year, it will be rescinded. The newspaper article below makes this absolutely clear.
Harriet Sherwood Thu 9 Feb 2023 18.39 GMT
Church of England priests will be permitted to bless the civil marriages of same-sex couples in a profound shift in the church’s stance on homosexuality after a historic vote by its governing body.
The first blessings for gay couples could happen this summer.
Individual churches will be encouraged to state clearly whether they will offer blessings to avoid confusion and disappointment.
After an impassioned debate lasting more than eight hours, the C of E’s national assembly, the General Synod, voted by 250 votes to 181 to back a proposal by bishops intended to end years of painful divisions and disagreement over sexuality.
But emotionally charged speeches from those advocating full equality for LGBTQ+ Christians and those arguing that traditional biblical teaching on marriage and sex must be upheld signalled that the debate is set to continue.
The synod also agreed that the church will apologise for the harm it has caused to LGBTQ+ people. It welcomed a forthcoming review of a ban on clergy entering into same-sex civil marriages and a celibacy rule for clergy in same-sex relationships.
Conservatives narrowly succeeded in amending the motion to state that the church’s doctrine of marriage – that it is between a man and a woman – was unchanged. Although progressives were dismayed by the amendment, it may have encouraged some traditionalists to cast their votes in favour of the main motion.
Justin Welby, the archbishop of Canterbury, and Stephen Cottrell, the archbishop of York, said they hoped the decision marked a “new beginning” for the C of E, saying: “It has been a long road to get us to this point.”
The archbishops said: “For the first time, the C of E will publicly, unreservedly and joyfully welcome same-sex couples in church."
You are trying to wind me up but I am not biting.
"The facts stare you in the face yet you continue to argue that black is white."
ReplyDeleteI am not arguing that black is white. I am simply stating a fact. It is true that AT THE MOMENT Anglican clergy cannot bless same sex marriages in church. It is also true that by the end of this year this ruling will be rescinded.
When I wrote this:
"Anglican priests have been allowed to enter same sex civil partnerships since 2005. Given that priests are now allowed to conduct the blessing of a same sex marriage, it can only be a matter of time before priests are allowed to contract a same sex marriage. And quite right too,to coin a phrase."
I should have qualified the second sentence as follows:
"Given that priests will soon, probably by the end of 2023, allowed to conduct the blessing of a same sex marriage in church, it can only be a matter of time before priests are allowed to contract a same sex marriage."
It is quite clear what you are doing - given that you are so rarely right about anything, it is only natural that you should make a meal of this occasion - even if your being right is purely temporary. Now that IS psychosis - like the narcissism that makes you write crap like this:
"It is irrational to claim, for FOUR YEARS, that you have written a novel which is scheduled for publication - when in fact the "novel" in question is only three thousand words long and would only ever be published at the author's expense
YES, IT IS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLICATION."
So tell us when? and by whom?