1. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #223796 by Auraboy on August 3, 2008 at 12:30 pm

Oh yes, the vast majority of edits will simply be for running time. I like the idea of all the actual footage of the interviews being made available. It's always a fun watch.

2. Evangelically Serious Science

Comment #223785 by Auraboy on August 3, 2008 at 12:19 pm

Richard working in the British media myself, often within the confines of documentary film making and editing and having worked for a lot of the independent production companies who supply these programmes I'm always amazed at how little editorial control you seem to get in these things. I'm not sure who works out your contracts and I assume it worked out totally as a third party presenter and narrator rather than with direct programme production credit but believe me, I've seen far lesser names get some serious muscle on in the editing suite as to what is shown, even to the point of having directors and exec producers in tears. I assume a lot of the cuts made in this regard were due to the programme going out in the 'science' or 'history-bio' strands rather than under 'religion and ethics'. It's tough dividing this line up when the programme clearly straddles that divide but tv politics is another reason I drink so heavily.

Best of luck with the programme of course. I'm sure we'll all enjoy it and feel the mounting frustration we often do when faced with such absurd denials.

3. A set of previews of 'The Genius of Charles Darwin'

Comment #223730 by Auraboy on August 3, 2008 at 10:01 am

Yes I am lucky. It is of course the circles I move in and not a general defence of religion. I was simply responding to the post before. The article is a media review and not a science or religious polemic and the statistic in question is the 4 in 10 creationist views held in Britain.

4. Why Islam Is Unfunny for a Cartoonist

Comment #223552 by Auraboy on August 2, 2008 at 5:54 pm

Because the case is due to come to court shortly and the report is more on the protests for and against that have been lodged than the original arrest.

5. Why Islam Is Unfunny for a Cartoonist

Comment #223542 by Auraboy on August 2, 2008 at 4:48 pm

I think that's supposed to be 'empathise' not 'emphasize'. Right beheading time.

6. Review interview: Richard Dawkins

Comment #223539 by Auraboy on August 2, 2008 at 4:44 pm

Oh yes there's luckily still room for debate with all my rather religously-fuzzy anglican, catholic and muslim friends who don't seem to want to ostracise or in some way blow me up. Most still think atheism is a very honourable and acceptable view until they dismiss it with 'but not in the Richard Dawkins sense'. Which I always assume they mean to mean 'rabid and frothing atheism'. And then I gently try to explain that this image is something designed by flailing opponents and lazy journalists rather than the genuine approach of Mr Dawkins himself. I think religious people are stunned when they consider the prospect of Richard sitting down to a meal with an Anglican minister and not tearing their throat out. Which is sad really. You won't find an evangelical sitting down for a calm discussion in case they become tainted. They'd rather shout and scream. It's interesting to see who has had the label 'strident' attached to them however.

7. Why Islam Is Unfunny for a Cartoonist

Comment #223536 by Auraboy on August 2, 2008 at 4:37 pm

Sorry Mum. *Hanging head in vague semblance of shame*

Of course the real worry is people who mistakenly use 'loose' to mean 'lose'. I tend to cave these infidels heads in with bricks as my English teacher decreed to my malleable young mind.

Anyway, back to religion and such serious subjects...

8. Review interview: Richard Dawkins

Comment #223529 by Auraboy on August 2, 2008 at 4:09 pm

Dawkins has often said he has a rather soft spot for the gentle anglican liberals who don't seem too frothing mad. I suppose you could argue this is a failing but I think it just shows that Richard is as far from the zealot he's occasionally portrayed as.

9. Review interview: Richard Dawkins

Comment #223526 by Auraboy on August 2, 2008 at 3:49 pm

Nothing like a strident mad dog foaming atheist to give us all a bad name eh?

10. Why Islam Is Unfunny for a Cartoonist

Comment #223521 by Auraboy on August 2, 2008 at 3:44 pm

Well this place is a sort of community but I post so infrequently and normally end up in some sort of rabid argument so I'll avoid judging anybody here for what they said elsewhere. Ah breeding for God thread eh? Well I would normally start reading but I suspect I'll just end up arguing.

Yes, provocative avatars. How scary. I'm sure I ended up in a gay sex orgy rant on one thread. Never mind. I'm sure people can take care of themselves.

I'll simply say that generally my inclination would be to look at this all rationally and try to see the non fanatical line but the more bullshit I hear spouted by the defenders of facism the more I become sickened and end up resorting to the same methods. Maybe this is just a human imperative then.

Good luck everyone.

11. A set of previews of 'The Genius of Charles Darwin'

Comment #223517 by Auraboy on August 2, 2008 at 3:34 pm

By no means do all Christians reject the theory of evolution. Hardly any that I know do. But I think the article was referring to the claim that 4 in 10 hold creationist views even in secularised old england. I don't know how accurate this statistic is but media reviews generally only go off what is stated by a programme.

12. Why Islam Is Unfunny for a Cartoonist

Comment #223516 by Auraboy on August 2, 2008 at 3:33 pm

Luckily I'm pretty drunk. Which does tend to lower my resort to calm and rational response. Right now I suspect that I'm sort of at the same sort of emotional flash fire response level of the average Islamic aggression firebrand complainer. Damn. Liberalism goes out the window when alcohol and cocaine gets flowing. Now I know how the fanatics feel.

I see there is a general argument from other boards between Fanusi and others so I'll just excuse myself from that like a good little fence sitter as I've missed too may of these threads to comment.

I'm slightly unsure what thewhiteperals avatar has to do with anything on here though. Maybe I'm just fucked up though. Ah well...

13. A set of previews of 'The Genius of Charles Darwin'

Comment #223468 by Auraboy on August 2, 2008 at 1:54 pm

Interesting idea. Probably a blank channel that simply broadcasts the card 'There's nobody here. Talk to real people.' 24 hours a day. Brilliant really.

14. Why Islam Is Unfunny for a Cartoonist

Comment #223466 by Auraboy on August 2, 2008 at 1:51 pm

Aggghhhhhhh.

I am seriously considering violent backlash soon. If only I wasn't so damn rational. These fucking nut jobs have it all their own way. The ability to totally lose it and behave however they like. It's enough to drive a sane man to killing people in the street. I suppose I should just take up religion and it'll all be alright then.

15. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #217735 by Auraboy on July 24, 2008 at 3:12 pm

It's nice to know a thread can go up shit creek without my help. Do carry on. It was fun reading.

16. Red hot enlightenment led me to believe in one fewer god

Comment #217727 by Auraboy on July 24, 2008 at 3:01 pm

Blinkers for a horse is almost certainly to do with them mimicking 'blinking' i.e closed eyelids. That's a guess. An indicator isn't really a blinking eyeball. But this conversation needs to end before we get onto trunks versus boots versus fenders versus bumpers and all that jazz.

17. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #216848 by Auraboy on July 23, 2008 at 2:54 pm

171. I was going to say Edouard, clearly someone massively overstated the effectiveness of Subway advertising. If I was the ad agency I'd take their money.

18. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #216824 by Auraboy on July 23, 2008 at 2:35 pm

162. You're right Al, I was blinded by my drunken violent rage but after I battered a few sensitive women folk artists in my flasher Mac I saw the light.

Still I really want an answer to the cat thing. It creeps me out.

Freedom of speech is a bitch.

19. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #216800 by Auraboy on July 23, 2008 at 2:23 pm

I don't know, I'm sure the art, poetry and music world is pretty much dominated by rejected young men. Isn't that what most of it comes down to? Besides, I've come across quite a number of violent rejected girls in my time. And you forgot the principle female outlet of cat ownership. What is that anyway?

20. Islam subway ads cause stir in New York

Comment #216785 by Auraboy on July 23, 2008 at 2:12 pm

Yes, I can see this thread needs me...

21. How Anecdotal Evidence Can Undermine Scientific Results

Comment #216748 by Auraboy on July 23, 2008 at 1:26 pm

I dislike quackery and homeopathy and all the rest of such nonsense as the next person but it should, perhaps in the interests of fairness, be noted that the Pharmaceutical industry does have a habit of not publishing studies that fail to reach it's public goals. Yes, I know, scientific studies are often abandoned for safety reasons and a whole other raft of reasons and it's not all a vast global conspiracy fuelled by money, but having actually worked on documentaries investigating the delayed removal of Thimerosal from certain vaccines (lawsuits actually prevented by certain provisions in the original Patriot Act) to the suicidal side effects of certain anti-depressants (ironic if nothing else) to the ongoing misprescription of numerous medicines by Doctor's throughout the U.S and U.K.

Science is not by far the best option, it is the ONLY option, and it is fair to say that the actual raw results of scientific studies have generally shown these problems up, it's only when the results are removed, ignored, denied or obfuscated away that science fails. And then the way becomes open for the deluded rants of the quacks.

22. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #216348 by Auraboy on July 23, 2008 at 2:23 am

Oh yes blame the Auraboys...Bloody victimisation. It's always the same.

There are some extreme over-reactions and grudges used to swing opinion. It's the rather tabloid nature of even the most 'considered' politics unfortunately.

I'm just about the most liberal minded person you can get and I was brought up in as left leaning a socialist Northern England background as it's really possible to have but I have no problem seeing the hypocrisy present all around, even in myself.

It's probably way off topic but for instance I always find the Holocaust Denial laws a little strange and unpleasant. I mean, sure, I hate the Nazi's and far-right politics, I detest the idea that someone can deny something but I've never liked the idea that we can lock someone up for saying it. Now if someone suggested carrying out a Holocaust THEN I'd be happy to see a trial. Same with Islamism or any other idea. You want to deny that violence has happened - well, you're free to be wrong and voice your opinion. But incite violence and it's another matter.

Voice your support for Hitler if you like, throw out a few Nazi salutes, really I think you should be allowed in a free society. It might not be pleasant but it's part of freedom. I'd still say that if you apply for a public post though where such views could impinge on your ability to rationally carry out your duties without discrimination a society is entitled to worry about, question and judge those views in context.

23. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215965 by Auraboy on July 22, 2008 at 3:13 pm

And I thought it was a point well made Dhamma I just wanted to keep dragging myself back to the original article for reference. I think I have been somewhat to blame for helping drag some threads off point so it was more about keeping it together for my sake.

I think the idea of blame, the danger of views, the limitations of responsibility etc are all brilliant arguments to be had and it's nice to have room to explore them here.

24. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215943 by Auraboy on July 22, 2008 at 2:20 pm

Dhamma - I agree. As I said very early on in this thread, this guy could have overcome any accusation of political expediency by just explaining that he used to believe some stuff that affected his judgement, he twisted facts to fit his religious friends and he shouldn't have done it.

There's a difference between being condemned for views you held that you no longer hold and treated like a criminal in everyday life and asking to be considered for a position in public life where your views could hold sway over lots of people's lives and health.

For instance I can condemn the Pope for the bizarre views of Catholicism but I can't really decry him for being part of the Hitler Youth. Of course he prefers to say 'he felt uncomfortable about it' rather than just say, 'I was brought up into it and it changed me for the better when I realised how wrong the whole thing was.' Okay, maybe not the best example, but I think I know what I mean.

25. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215909 by Auraboy on July 22, 2008 at 1:36 pm

118. Dhamma - Very interesting. I suppose in order to have any relevance to this particular thread's point though is, if you 'today' asked to join a position of authority on say Equal Rights and you had aired racist views many years ago, wouldn't you be expected to explain when and why your views changed? That's what we're talking about with the Surgeon general.

The point about the age of responsibility is a different one. Of course it's easy to see how being brought up with racism permeates and clouds a child's early views. Lots of people change their views as they get older and learn more.

26. Nine face stoning death in Iran

Comment #215862 by Auraboy on July 22, 2008 at 12:50 pm

Most people state their own side as the freedom fighters. Nobody ever really thinks theirs is the dark side. I have a lot of Irish friends here who still have relatively benign ties to Irish Republicanism and to some extent have seen the IRA as freedom fighters and soldiers. Of course this position gets a little awkward when they blew our homes up in Manchester etc.

27. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215818 by Auraboy on July 22, 2008 at 12:09 pm

Are you saying you've noticed a hint of hypocrisy amongst party politics of both the U.K and U.S?? I'm quite frankly stunned to hear this. It's a revelation and no mistake. Of course you can see just about any example of this from either side. I think deciding this is only a problem that afflicts the conservative elements of politics is a trifle...well...blind. Or hypocritical. Ahem.

Of course this is the same Aitken who found Jesus in prison, became a theological scholar, divorced his wife after getting his ill-gotten gains in a trust fund and then remarried after securing access to these funds. I believe he may well have something to say about prison reform, and long may it continue. However if he asked for a job on an international anti-bribery and corruption ethics committee and suggested that his prior antics were not quite as bad as they seemed, THEN we'd be talking about the same sort of thing.

28. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215599 by Auraboy on July 22, 2008 at 7:12 am

Fair comment. I expect the nominees of the next President will come under fire of a different kind. Political appointees tend to be the very definition of compromise. Bush's problem (at least from this distance) often seemed to be the sheer power he wielded in the first term, with the overwhelming Republican majority, got him into the habit of appointing whoever he wanted, regardless of how idealogically unpalatable they were. If you're a right wing conservative you see such actions as sticking to principles, if you're of a more liberal slant you see pig-headed arrogance.

We should always be careful about the thought police actions of condemning a man who may have changed views drastically but he probably could have actually apologised for the paper, or admitted that it didn't reflect even the science of the time.

29. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215576 by Auraboy on July 22, 2008 at 6:34 am

I think the primary problem and worry is the manner in which he disowned the paper. There was no acceptance that he distorted medical facts to appease a religious viewpoint. He simply claimed that the paper was not a scientific study and science had moved on. I am all for giving anybody a second chance. I have seen the most extreme of racists change their views wholeheartedly and I would not accept half the views I may have held 17 years ago (admittedly I was a child then). Still, if you're asking for a job as chief medical practioner in the U.S.A havign twisted medical facts before should have some explanation.

30. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215351 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 5:09 pm

Phiwilli - I'm not only convinced, but see evidence of it daily, that many in administrative and political positions hold personal views that they can readily separate from the duties they carry out. I suppose what concerned me was more that a person would choose NOT to separate those positions by openly signing their name to something that is clearly not intended as a scientific study and instead is a religiously tinted opinion piece and THEN claim not to agree with this action when it interferes with the possibility of a chosen career appointment.

Perhaps I have explained myself badly. I did suggest that it is difficult to know where to draw the line in terms of evidence of a change in position and perhaps this man should have the benefit of the doubt. But, personally at least, I found the non-apology apology a weak explanation. The idea of a medical professional 'cherry-picking' data and twisting facts to an agenda may be perfectly legal as an opinion piece enacted entirely separately to any appointment in later years, but it does smack of hypocrisy.

31. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215340 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 4:54 pm

Well clearly I don't get a vote in the U.S election but statements like that do give me a little hope.

32. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215337 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 4:48 pm

Well I'm only coming at this from the rather limited British viewpoint, but it would seem, at least before the pandering of election year began in earnest, that both candidates are less idealogically religious than Bush claims to be (i'm fairly certain it was just a vote-winning agenda) but in the same way that a President gets to make more laws vicariously by getting a member of the Supreme Court appointed, it seems that a politically safe way of dealing with contentious religious issues is to get certain people into these appointed positions. Obama or Mccain will still have to pay a lot of lip-service to religious positions but if they stack the real science and medical appointments with less idealogues than previously, seems a safe way to restore some sanity.

33. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215332 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 4:37 pm

Thank you thewhitepearl. I guess it can be very civilized on here after all.

I'm interested really because I assume the next elected President will have quite a different set of appointees regardless of who wins. And since a lot of power is wielded by those who have a say on medical and scientific matters, elected or not, it should probably be of interest to see who ends up with the job.

P.S The Boy with the Unusual Aura, and Auraboy is a name I got stuck with during the attempted debunking of a popular Cornish psychic and is even more boring than listening to internet trolls.

34. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215329 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 4:28 pm

"Indeed, perhaps you should change your picture to a mouse or something. ;o)"

Yes but then you'd have Richard Gere in here getting all excited. Beware Corylus.

35. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215327 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 4:26 pm

No, perhaps not, but it's always nice when at least someone apologises isn't it? :)

Vaguely on topic, being a little out of the loop on U.S Political appointments, and as this article is from months ago, what exactly did happen with the Surgeon General position?

36. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215321 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 4:13 pm

Well I generally apologise for helping to drag this thread off track earlier.

67. That's a rather interesting insight into the man. I guess it's really rather sad to see what some people will put their name to for a church propaganda piece.
Not sure which would be worse actually. Having such a religious bias that he can't be trusted to leave that bias behind, or that he didn't even believe the crap he signed his name to but did it for the benefit of the Methodist Church because he felt compelled. Neither is exactly great news for a man lobbying for such a position.

37. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215300 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 3:23 pm

55. Don't be too harsh. Years later, when it could have ruined his job interview he was gracious enough to admit that it was not a scientific study. We have to be willing to accept his profound apology and change of heart here...

I wonder if he could have lobbied for a Surgeons General warning on condoms, 'Warning may cause sin, especially for you homos who don't understand that pipe fittings are named by religious scholars.'

52. It's too late for us all. But we can apologise about this thread or at least disown it in a few decades.

38. The brain in love

Comment #215293 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 3:16 pm

Lionel Shriver wrote some interesting pieces about the strange way society can ostracise a woman who shows no maternal instinct and refuses to have children. I see it a lot with girls I know who choose not to be mothers, feel no need for it, no biological tick, no brooding quality.

In guys like me who say it, it's almost acceptable. If a guy gives up the opportunity of children for some career development, or religious reason, it's almost noble.

If you're female, well, you obviously hate children. Or are hinting that you hate children. Or have some emotional retardation. It's amazingly prevalent even in some of the rather liberal circles I swim in. Even to the point where people prefer to assume a girl without children is physically infertile and will probably adopt rather than believe their protestations that they just choose not to be mothers.

39. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215287 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 3:09 pm

Sorry Al, I was only joking. You look so engrossed in that hot dog and the latent sexual tension between the Pearl and yourself...I was sort of overwhelmed.

This whole thread spelunked rather rapidly really. back to death by stoning I think.

40. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215267 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 2:53 pm

Al you must see anal cock pounding a little too easily. Although spelunking is such a great word it did need referencing into this conversation...

...which I did momentarily try to veer back on topic...sort of like trying to avoid that iceberg...worked out well.

41. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215260 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 2:46 pm

33. And his distancing seems to have been limited to 'This was not a scientific study'...As it was just a fluff piece for the Methodist church, he was allowed to make stuff up. Okay.

34. Really? I'd never have guessed.

42. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215253 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 2:39 pm

I'm assuming it's not for the purposes of reproduction.

43. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215248 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 2:34 pm

24. I'd have to parse that sentence first, a British Bottom or bottom of the internet? Etc...

I think it's interesting that we'd (well you'd -Americans- for those of you of that persuasion) can stop a person holding office for having a criminal record or a record of holding extremist viewpoints but it's interesting as I said, at which point does forgiveness or evidence of ending that opinion, that rehabilitation come in? Should you stop someone who held racist, sexist or homophobic views in print from automatically holding office in the same way? I'm not sure, but I'd say when you're asking to be promoted into a position of power without a direct public election the burden of proof would have to be on you to show you wouldn't bring that bigotry into play again.

44. Nine face stoning death in Iran

Comment #215242 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 2:28 pm

Did any of the brits or those with access to Channel 4 over here catch the rather interesting, if fundamentally flawed documentary, 'The Qu'ran'? I assume for many of you it would have, quite superficially covered a lot of ground you know a lot more about, but it was quite interesting hearing the interviewees from various Islamic factions throughout the world explain their varying views on punishment by stoning etc and their exact references to the Koran.
It did remind me of the ongoing murderous persecution of homosexuals by the African Anglican movement and their distinctly differing views on it's reasoning - although obviously on a much larger and more bloody scale.

It was a rather failed documentary, which I sort of expected sadly, but the film of a city turning to a radical islamic code over twenty years was quite stunning. To see an country revert so quickly and suddenly doesn't really hit home until you see the footage of the same street over the recent decades.

45. The brain in love

Comment #215237 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 2:17 pm

I want sex because of the physical high. I want love because I'm a hopeless romantic who delights in the sublime mixture of companionship and excitement. I don't want children because my hopeless romanticism ends with something that soils itself and I'm supposed to adore.

Oh I don't know. Maybe it really is a less selfish act not to have children. In a societal stance. Although I hear that fundamentalist religion is outbreeding us which I assume is some sort of call for mass controlled atheist/rationalist breeding programmes or something.

46. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215233 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 2:11 pm

Never be gentle with political appointees or arrogant British internet boys.

Yeah, it's an interesting point. What do you forgive? Or more accurately what evidence do you take of general retraction of views versus political expediency?

I see Bush is a recovering alcoholic. I believe that. Not so sure about the recovering moron part etc (insert past seven years of mild Anti-Bush humour here).

I need to stop with the inserting innuendo.

47. Surgeon General Nominee Dismisses Homosexuality Paper

Comment #215225 by Auraboy on July 21, 2008 at 2:00 pm

I don't know, if he was writing a scientific paper on behalf of the methodist church I'm not sure it's peer-review process was expected to be that stringent.

Ah the old Anal loosening. It worries them so. Oddly enough the male rectum recovers quicker than the female, but don't tell the girls I know.

48. Antony Flew reviews the Index of The God Delusion

Comment #214492 by Auraboy on July 20, 2008 at 2:16 pm

What a strange diatribe. If you care to open The God Delusion you'll find all of the points Flew mentions answered. The religious views of Einstein, a rather judgement free description of the variations in belief, including a rather word for word explanation of Deism versus Theism and noting, as Flew seems to have missed, the explanation in various forms of Jefferson's religious leanings.

I can understand someone wanting to throw stones at Richard's tone (as most of the negative reviews did, as they had nothing else to really go for) but to apparently have missed both the index and text of the book in question seems a grave oversight if not a slightly sad act of senility.

Really quite sad reading. A bit like watching an old person soil themselves. I'd rather not attack. It deserves sympathy rather than vitriol.

49. 'Condoms won't change HIV rates'

Comment #212665 by Auraboy on July 17, 2008 at 2:14 pm

To quote the Popester today -

"Our world has grown weary of greed, exploitation and division, of the tedium of false idols and piecemeal responses, and the pain of false promises,"

Really? Greed, exploitation and division fuelled by the tedium of a false idol with false promises? Well I guess you should know sir.

"I ask myself, could anyone standing face to face with people who actually do suffer violence and sexual exploitation explain that these tragedies, portrayed in virtual form, are considered merely entertainment?"

Er, yes. The major problem with sexual exploitation is an episode of CSI dealing with child abuse...Right. It's not entertainment dammit, child rape is...well...tradition!

50. The Return of Religion

Comment #212659 by Auraboy on July 17, 2008 at 2:08 pm

Anglican Olympics! Yes! Sex up that conference...well not with women obviously, that would be grotesque, vaginas in frocks is rather sickening, better to have lots of men in silly hats. It's really like Gladiators. We can have Archbishop Rowan 'THE DRUID' Williams using his welsh crook to battle his way through a horde of angry, strident, jesus-loves-straight-men-only clergy (in matching purple gowns), through the 'Schism pool'.

I believe he's well placed for a Gold medal in fence sitting.