Sunday, 19 December 2010

Small time sinner.

But working on it.

The Church regards gambling as a sin. I don't gamble, not for any religious reason but because I'm no good at it. I cannot recall any mention of gambling as sinful in the Bible.

Smoking is also not mentioned at all in the Bible. Drink is mentioned, as in turning water into wine and Noah getting plastered when the Ark hit land, and who could blame him? Drinking isn't banned, only drunkenness is frowned on.

Adultery, yes, there is a very specific commandment about that. And killing, and stealing, and coveting. Definite rules there. Gambling though? Smoking? No mention as far as I know.

There are seven deadly sins. Lust, avarice, gluttony, pride, anger, sloth and the other one. Well, it's late. Few of these feature in biblical texts, they were made up by the Catholics to boost the guilt levels of their population.

One thing that is very clear in the Bible is that God doesn't like gays. On the first set of stone tablets that Moses smashed, it didn't say 'No graven images'. That was added later to replace the 'No poofters' line. Oh, this is no bull, not even a golden one. All through the Bible there are places where it says 'You're not welcome' to gays, to the extent that I have been frequently baffled as to why anyone gay wants to join any religion that says, quite clearly, it doesn't want them. Certain other religions are even more restrictive in this regard, you know.

So when a Christian preacher says that homosexuality is a sin, he is saying what he genuinely believes. I don't have to agree because I am neither homosexual nor Christian so neither standpoint affects me at all. All the same, he believes it and to my mind, he can say what he believes. Nobody is forced to listen. He is not saying 'push a wall on top of them' or 'throw them off a mountain', he is just saying he believes it to be sinful in the eyes of his God. Having read that book, yes, that's definitely what it says in there. More than once.

This man did not call for any hatred or violence against gays. He merely said that in his view it was sinful. He does not want them hanged from cranes or buried under rubble, he just wants gays to go straight.

Well that's not going to happen. Even so, all he's saying is that he'd like it to happen. I'd like booze and tobacco to be handed out for free but that's not going to happen. I'd like to have a government instead of an EU admin department but that's not very likely either. It is not wrong to wish for those things, as long as the wishing is words and not violent action. Nowhere in the Bible does it say 'Thou shalt not think' although there is legislation in parliament to that effect, and it's an absolute requirement for MPs.

If someone says to me 'I don't like smoking or drinking', I can only respond 'Well, don't do those things.' If they come back with 'I don't want you do do them either,' I have to say 'That's unfortunate, because you are not going to get what you want'. That's the end of it.

Unless they come back and say 'You will live your life as I direct or I will make you suffer.' Then it's war.

This preacher did not declare war. He said 'I disapprove' and that's all. He was arrested. By a gay PCSO, so no conflict of interest there, eh? Consider what would happen if a straight PCSO arrested a gay activist for proclaiming that gayness was normal, and that the straight PCSO was weird for not accepting his view?

There is no fan on the planet that could cope with the amount of shit that would have hit it. All the lefties would have been baying for blood. Homophobia! Difference of opinion? No! Homophobia! They would shriek for harsher punishments than even those they want for smokers. Burn the heretic!

In this case, the preacher was eventually compensated with taxpayer's money. So common sense did not win after all. It never does. If a racist official does something to attack Asians, those Asians are compensated with taxpayer's money. If a misogynist official attacks women, the women are compensated with taxpayer's money. If a gay official attacks someone who doesn't like his lifestyle, that person is compensated with taxpayer's money. What does the official pay? Nothing at all.

If the official is proven to discriminate against drinkers, smokers or fat people, he/she/it will get a promotion.

And this is the point. Not the preacher's opinion, not the PCSO's personal use of a law he made up to suit himself. Accountability.

The public sector has none. Not one jot. You can say 'the police were sued' or 'the council were sued' but no, they weren't. In every case, the taxpayer was sued. None of the individuals pay a penny. They screw up and go to court, we pay their fines and costs. They lose nothing. All they do is crank up our taxes to cover the cost.

All that compensation comes from taxes. If I was convicted of something and told to pay compensation, I would be the one paying it. If I took a council official to court, won, and was granted compensation... I would be the one paying it through taxes. In my case I'd have a criminal record. In the council case, the nameless official would not. It would be a mark against me in the first scenario, a mark against a faceless, fluid entity called 'the council' in the second.

This is socialism. If you're not part of the Collective you are alone. If you are part of the Collective you are protected but you have no identity, no individuality. Will the Coagulation change this? Excuse me while I dissolve into hysterical laughter for a moment.

There are no individuals in the Coagulation. There are none in Government. The Coagulation is merely the currently dominant segment of the Collective. They are all part of the Collective and all subservient to the EU. They all have the Nuremberg defence of 'I vos only obeyink orders' to fall back on. None of them are individually accountable and they know it.

Until they are, they will never act as human beings.

They will always act like the ultimate in socialism. The Borg.

And you think you might be a sinner?


Stewart Cowan said...

Three uniformed officers arrested the preacher. Clearly none of them knew the law, or maybe they were worried they would themselves be labelled "homophobic" so went along with the homosexual plastic plod.

There are probably more and more cops like Phil and Nige from "Early Doors". And they look professional compared to the PCSOs.

I am a sinner. We need salvation from our sins or we will be tormented by them forever. A pain worse than anything.

This is the reason some of us speak out about homosexuality, not because, as some suggest, we are 'homophobic' or closet cases.

The other issue is the fact that the 'gay agenda' forced on us is for the purpose of changing attitudes in order to change society.

Homosexuality has been taboo in almost every culture (other than their elites, I expect) because those elites know the damage sin causes to the people they depend on for their wealth and power.

Hedonism produces apathy and laziness and gradual decline of the culture which is eventually ripened for a take-over. That's what's happening to the UK and most of the West.

Is smoking a sin? Is your body a temple?

Is gambling a sin? I gambled on just about anything for a few years. It's a thrill when you win, of course, but overall you lose and waste a shocking amount of time. I used to study the Racing Post for an hour or two every day, then there's the time at the racetrack, dog track, betting shop, card school.

A sinful waste of time.

Leg-iron said...

Stewart - I respect you views while at the same time respecting the views of those you disapprove of. Disapproval is not harmful. People do things I don't approve of every day. I'd rather they didn't and I might well say so, but I would never advocate violence against them to force them to comply with my preferences.

I suspect that's your position too. It's clear you have a religious reason for disapproving of homosexuality and I don't see any problem with you saying so. Likewise, I have no problem with homosexuality because it doesn't affect me. It doesn't conflict with my beliefs and it doesn't impinge on my life.

Homosexuality has been taboo in almost every culture (other than their elites, I expect) because those elites know the damage sin causes to the people they depend on for their wealth and power.

Now here you are on to something, but you might not like it. Being gay is not-conforming. Catholics, remember, the initial church, the one with all the money, depends on people having lots of children to outgrow other faiths and other versions of Christianity. Oh, and to pay more tithes to Mr. Pope.

So they banned condoms completely until recent days (they're now losing more to STD than they are gaining) and they have always clamped down hard on homos.

It's true that the Bible says tat being gay is wrong but is it really the most important message in there? Catholic priests have to be celibate so it really shouldn't matter about their sexual preferences - they can't indulge anyway - and only the act, not the thought, is sin.

Yet this has been ramped up to be the Big Thing of Christianity when really, it's an aside.

A distraction from the real message in there, so Christians don't notice the wars and the hate and the dilution of their existence by multiculturalism and by idiots who think that pandering to the overtaking religion is a clever idea.

Once, this country followed the pagan gods led by the sun god Huw Gadarn (symbolised by a tree at the winter solstice, ahem) and his son, Hesus.

The priests at the time were conciliatory to the incoming Christians. They teamed up against the hedonistic Romans.

See many around now?

Watch those distractions. They can hide a multitude of real sins.

Oh, and my body is not a temple. Just a body, and not a great one at that. I'm the only one who can stand to live in here.

Your arguments on teaching homosexuality to small children, I agree with on the grounds that small children should be exposed to no sexuality at school at all, whether homo or hetero. It is no place of schools to teach any more than the basic mechanics, absolutely not the morality.

School should be about learning and not about indoctrinated morality.

Anonymous said...

Cowan: Is smoking a sin? Is your body a temple?

The “body as a temple” idea is being severely misrepresented by many so-called “Christians” which then only feeds the carnality of the time. The New Testament references to “the temple” specifically indicate sexual immorality and false doctrine as defilement of “the temple”.

The “1 Corinthians 3:16-17, 6-19” teaching refers to Christians individually and collectively being the “temple of the Spirit.” Defilement of the temple, which it abhors, concerns essentially corruption by false doctrine and not what one ingests or inhales. It also indicates that worldly “wisdom” (e.g., eugenics, the medical model, statisticalism) is foolishness. For example,

“Do you not discern and understand that you [the whole church at Corinth] are God’s temple (His sanctuary), and that God’s Spirit has His permanent dwelling in you – to be at home in you [collectively as a church and also individually]? If any one does hurt to God’s temple or corrupts [it with false doctrines] or destroys it, God will do hurt to him and bring him to the corruption of death and destroy him. For the temple of God is holy – sacred to Him – and that [temple] you [the believing church and its individual believers] are. Let no person deceive himself. If any one among you supposes that he is wise in this age – let him discard his [worldly] discernment and recognize himself as dull, stupid and foolish, without [true] learning and scholarship; let him become a fool that he may become [really] wise. For this world’s wisdom is foolishness – absurdity and stupidity – with God.” (1 Corinthians, 3:16-19 – Amplified Bible)

Anonymous said...

I noticed that since you posted a Captain Beefheart song that he has died.
You and your filthy fiftieth -hand smoke!!!

This is conclusive evidence that smoking bloggers kill and will have to be banned.

I will be making up some statistics and drawing a convincing looking graph to send off to ASH as soon as I can pull some numbers out of my arse.

Billy the Fish said...

The Borg eh, Leggy?

Imagine Harriet Harperson or that little ginger freak dressed up in spandex a la Seven of Nine. Now that would be enough to trigger nightmares!

Seriously though, how did the Borg mantra go? "You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile. Freedom is irrelevant. You must comply."

Yep. Fabians all right...

Snowolf said...

'He was arrested. By a gay PCSO'

Really? I'd love to know which Act of Parliament has given PCSO's power of arrest.

More likely he went running to a PC, amplified the story and the PC felt the preacher's collar for fear of being tarred with the homophobe brush himself.

For what it is worth, I think the preacher is wrong. If we assume that there is a God, and if we assume that God makes us, for God to hate someone because of the way he made them is illogical in the extreme. But then whoever accused the religious of being logical?

For the PCSO to make a fuss about it is disproportionate, but then whoever accused the police (especially those with a persecution/entitlement complex) of being proportionate?

Religion and political correctness - what a heady mix.

(wv: ponsfa, given the Star Trek reference, so close to being ponn-far, so close.)

Nomine said...

wonderfully argued as usual LI am dropping your link in my blog roll,and lighting a large ciggy as I do it!

druid this week said...

Religion is just a scam like any other scam. They change and update the rules to suit themselves and keep the mugs happy. It's even better than the global warming scam because you don't meet the sky pixie until you die so there's no evidence to support their weird claims when you're alive.

In other news...
The govt are going to stop taking tax and national insurance from smokers and fat people because they have decided not to treat them properly...

sixtypoundsaweekcleaner said...

'Tis true that the Lord hates homosexuality, but He also hates others things too. Adultery and divorce for instance. The Church seems to forget this, when it suits it.

In Proverbs 6, He says He hates haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.

Our politicians should take note.

Nomine said...

Thank you for that quote from proverbs SPAWC I have put it in my blogs sidebar as being particularly apt to the theme of my blog. Well done m8!

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr Leg iron

Power without responsibility – that pretty much sums up so called government at all levels and the attitudes of our erstwhile public servants.

Our current incarnation of hatchet men intent on countrycide are cutting yet another slice off our national identity and chucking it in the bin. Amongst our quisling governments many attacks is the indecent haste to destroy the Post Office and Royal Mail. Our governments appear to be the only ones to be implementing the directive on privatising postal services: your post is as likely to be delivered by TNT, UKMail or DHL (part of Deutsche Post).

The last nail in the coffin is the proposed sale of the Royal Mail, possibly to a foreign buyer, who may or may not deign to put the Queen’s head on the stamp:

Introducing an EU postage stamp requires that national stamps be eliminated. Where better to start than with the country that invented them. Killing the British postage stamp would be the greatest trophy of them all, eliminating the one stamp without the country name and the EU can maintain its programme of stamping ‘EU’ and the star strangled banner on everything.

And we pay for it all.


Allowing this to happen and paying for it makes us all sinners.


Dave H. said...

(Just a quick technical note: it's Lust, Avarice, Gluttony, Vanity (same as Pride?), Anger, Sloth and Envy.

I certainly don't know this through having a developed moral sense. It isn't even the list (so far as I'm aware) according to the Bible or Hiernoymous Bosch or whatever, it's the one according to Peter Cook. (in which Raquel Welch played Lust, Barry Humphries, Envy, and so on. I can't remember the names of the other actors, but it#s easy to remember that Sloth was a Lawyer))

Little Black Sambo said...

"the sky pixie"
Gosh, that's an amusing phrase!
"Lust, avarice, gluttony, pride, anger, sloth and the other one ... Few of these feature in biblical texts..."
You'll find them all in there somewhere.

Anonymous said...

Very nice post LI... You said, "It's true that the Bible says tat being gay is wrong but is it really the most important message in there?" I would say the more important message would be:

Rom 8:35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? [shall] tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
Rom 8:39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Of course there's a lot more to it, but I think this would cover the multitude.

Master Bates said...

And then they came for the wankers and I was silent...

Anonymous said...

Very off topic -- sorry.

You will no doubt already have found this.

But just in case --

Stewart Cowan said...


Needless to say, I don't approve of violence towards anyone. I believe our traitors should be tried and sentenced to death when found guilty, regardless of their sexuality!

I disagree that others' behaviour doesn't impinge on your life. There are two main areas of concern with homosexual behaviour - the first is salvation for the individuals concerned, which if you aren't religious doesn't concern you.

The second is irrespective of any religion and it is the fact that hedonism causes problems in society. I believe this is one of the main reasons for the disintegration of our culture. It affects us all, and is the reason we have (had) laws to restrict certain behaviour.

The globalists know this full well and it's why they promote sin as normal and wholesome.

There is no doctrinal reason that I know of to force Catholic priests to be celibate. I think it's extremely cruel and unnecessary to deny someone being part of a loving family.

Homosexuality is mentioned very rarely in churches in my experience, so the perception that it's a Big Thing is due to the media and bloggers like myself, probably, but when state-funded fakecharities like Stonewall are allowed into schools to try to normalise their perversions, then I get very upset.

But, yes, it can be seen as a diversion, but I believe there are major crimes being committed against children and society through the homosexual agenda. You have to ask yourself why personal sexual behaviour which was taboo a decade ago is now being trumpeted.

As Lenin said, "Destroy the family, you destroy the country."

We know the government doesn't give two hoots about any of us, so why would they care about stopping all criticism of homosexuality?

They don't; it's all political.

Stewart Cowan said...


The Almighty doesn't hate homosexuals, just what they get up to ;)

"Religion and political correctness - what a heady mix."

PC is the antithesis of Christianity.

P.S. I have been told I am very logical!

Leg-iron said...

Billy - Hideous Harman in the Seven of Nine suit? The pain she would experience would be unimaginable.

I say, let her try.

Leg-iron said...

Seems it was a gay C3PO who enlisted some gullible (and overly PC PCs) to make the arrest. Doesn't matter to me, they all work for the same Saddam in the end.

Leg-iron said...

Sixtypoundsaweekcleaner - you just described Tony Blair. Who the Poop has spoken to personally and accepted as a Catholic.

The Borgias just went down a notch, I think.

Leg-iron said...

Dave H - you know the one I'd forgotten!

I'm jealous.

Leg-iron said...

Master Bates - caught that one. I don't think they are really after the foreskin-friction fraternity. That's just an excuse.

Leg-iron said...

Anon - I hadn't found that. Thanks.

Nomine said...

Oh sorry LI I thought i had said , what an excellent post this was but reading back I see only my excitement at Sixty's quote, I hope I may be forgiven for that oversight as it truly was a great posting that you penned (note to myself, must try harder to keep my eye on the ball)

Nomine said...

oh reading back a bit further I see I did! tsk tsk (take your own advice nomine)

Leg-iron said...

Stewart - hedonism isn't just sex. It's also ferality and self-importance and it brought down the Roman empire and many others.

Stonewall (which does not speak for gay people as much as it speaks for itself) is just one incarnation. Hoodies with knives are another. The shift in the attitudes of politicians and town clerks is another. We're going the way of Rome but faster.

There are those who relish this collapse but history shows that it is always replaced with... pretty much the same thing.

Nero, Berlusconi, van Rumpy, Cleggeron, none could see what happened on the streets below them.

There was Caligula Blair, the imbecile Claudius Brown, and then...

History is rarely taught any more. That's why it keeps repeating itself.

You're right, hedonism is a sign of collapse. But it's not just one thing.

It's a lot of things, all of which are here now.

Leg-iron said...

Nomine - I can only recommend my own approach.

Pour another glass and say 'Ah, the hell with it'.

Works for me.

Anonymous said...

The link to the smoking article does not seem to work.

THIS one does

opinions powered by