Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Joe Lycett

GET UPDATES FROM Joe Lycett
 

The Church of England is a Drunk Bloke in a Wetherspoon

Posted: 13/06/2012 11:13

Only last weekend I went to a civil partnership between two women. Two brilliant women who were clearly and deeply in love with one another. They made promises to each other, they exchanged rings, they had a first dance, they cut a cake. But one thing they did not do - use the word marriage.

In fact, I learned in one of the speeches that they were legally not allowed to use the word marriage. There were poems, readings and songs that they could not use because they contained the word marriage. For example, if they wanted to use Bruno Mars' song 'Marry You' it would be banned. Bruno Mars is banned from all civil partnerships. AND HE HAS SUCH GOOD SKIN.

This, of course, is pathetic and ridiculous but I highlight it because it's no more pathetic and ridiculous than not allowing gay people to get married in the first place. It illustrates just how far we have to go. 

I write this in light of the recent pissy outburst by the ever hypocritical Church of England who have said that all of their fold are unequivocally against it (which is simply not true) and which has since been published in most major news outlets. And their arguments are unsurprisingly based on habit rather than reason. I'm baffled as to why we're listening to the C of E when they consistently operate like a national school bully. As I wrote on twitter yesterday, the church was set up by Henry VIII, a man who had two of his six wives beheaded. And they're telling gay people they can't be trusted with marriage. Having the C of E tell me that I can't marry another man is akin to having my old boss at mini-golf coming up to me in the street and telling me I can't have a shit break. 

My issue here isn't necessarily what the Church or any other religious organisation has to say about it. They're pretty predictable in their archaism and cavalier contempt. My concern is that nationally publishing views from an old and out-of-touch institution, essentially saying that to be gay is bad for society, makes life so much harder for people that are coming to terms with their sexuality. They see that people who have come out are still struggling to get the same rights as everyone else. And so maybe they don't come out and live a lie. And that makes me sad.

When I was at school I was occasionally picked on by kids for 'acting gay' or being camp. I developed a line in riposte which was 'don't bend over then'. I was clearly an amazing child. But it made me think for most of my life that my sexuality would be a problem and that my life would never be as perfect as those kids who tormented me. A couple of weeks ago I saw one of those kids drinking a pint of lager in a Wetherspoons at 11am. And he was wearing a fleece. I realised, in that moment, that I totally win.

So, if you're one of those kids (or adults) that is scared to come out because people think it's wrong or that you shouldn't get married and live like everyone else, know that most of those people drink in Wetherspoons at 11am and wear fleeces. And you totally win.

If you'd like to stick your nose in, like the C of E did, on gay marriage you can provide your opinion in the Home Office's consultation here.

 

Follow Joe Lycett on Twitter: www.twitter.com/joelycett

FOLLOW UK COMEDY
Only last weekend I went to a civil partnership between two women. Two brilliant women who were clearly and deeply in love with one another. They made promises to each other, they exchanged rings, the...
Only last weekend I went to a civil partnership between two women. Two brilliant women who were clearly and deeply in love with one another. They made promises to each other, they exchanged rings, the...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 60
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
famullar
08:00 PM on 06/18/2012
A home loan helps making a family's dream of owning a house, a pleasant reality. Adding to this, a home loan also helps save tax. Borrowers are eligible for certain tax benefits on the principal and interest components of a loan under the Income Tax Act. You can avail tax relief against the amount paid for the purpose of purchase or construction of a residential property . Consider a self-occupied property . The payment made towards the principal repayment of the borrowed amount from a recognised financial institution is allowed as a deduction . When borrowed money is used for acquisition, construction or repair of a house, the amount of interest payable on the capital is allowed as a deduction of the Act. You can claim a tax rebate against interest paid on a home loan The principal amount gets a tax rebate of a maximum . Does timing your house purchase at the beginning of a financial year bring you additional tax advantage? Let us consider different scenarios. The tables given here show a comparison of tax deduction benefits when the loan commences from different dates. I thank you Firozali A.Mulla DBA
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
famullar
07:48 PM on 06/18/2012
Do you find yourself getting to the end of the day and wondering where the time went? Maybe you started out prepared to accomplish some very specific tasks, but somehow you just didn't get to them. Putting out fires and dealing with lesser issues can pull people away from longer-term goals. But if that happens every day, chances are you won't be in business much longer.1. Make and post a list: There's no point in making a list if it ends up under all of your unopened mail at the end of the day. Post it right where you will see it every time you look up, answer the phone or turn to your computer. By keeping it within your field of sight you can also keep it top-of-mind.2. Shut your door: I know this seems like the opposite of good management practice. Aren't you supposed to be available to employees when they have a problem? Well, if you aren't focusing on your business they will definitely have a problem -- finding another job. Right now as an entrepreneur it's company first, employees second. And maybe if they can't reach you they will take some initiative and solve their own problems.I thank you Firozali A.Mulla DBA
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
famullar
07:29 PM on 06/18/2012
The best advice my dad ever gave me was one on humility. Shocking as it might be for some to believe, I was not the best student for a while there. In fact, my grades were so bad, all my Dad would ask is, You could you try next semester to get a number "in front" of the decimal point" in your grade point average? He would never be alarmed though, seemingly confident that, in time, I would do OK. Sure enough, as I got my act together and started assembling a career in adult life, he'd come back to remind me, "Remember, son, stay humble. In your case it will come in handy." There is NO ONE in this world that does not LOVE my dad. He lived most of his life and his family opened a car dealership there. It is currently the oldest privately held business in the entire state. Why? Because my father is a “one of a kind” kind of guy. My dad is not only a great businessman; he is also a great man…involved for years in supporting his community by serving on boards, giving to charity and remaining active in his religion. Best of all, my dad gets along with everyone because of his amazing disposition with people. My dad just makes everyone feel comfortable and most importantly he makes everyone laugh. I thank you Firozali A.Mulla DBA
01:21 PM on 06/18/2012
The definitions of " Perversion " are :

" To use something for other than it was invented for "

And

" To gain sexual arousal from something not considered normal "

Homosexuality fits both these definitions, what do the Homosexuality Community want to do next, have this definity changed ???
It is like the Government changing the definition of " Poverty " to take thousands out of " poverty ".. is that right ??... Ofcourse not !!!!
03:22 PM on 06/18/2012
The meaning of "normal" changed? If your idea of normal is so straitened, yes.

'Normal' once meant no interracial marriage; no votes for women; children leaving school at 12 (those lucky enough to start); routine corporal and capital punishment; lower life spans for everyone and far high child mortality because no neonatal care of note or antibiotics or X-rays or radiotherapy or modern medicine of any kind; no IV conception; no electricity (damned as anti-christian by plenty when first discovered); no flying off on holidays; no carrots out of season etc etc. Unless you advocate everyone going back to live in caves - in fact, unless you actually live in a cave and eat only what you grow and catch, which you clearly don't as you're posting on this via your unnatural magic box of tricks - you should temper your fervent claims to absolute insight on what is 'normal'.

You remind me of that old quote from Bertrand Russell, "The whole problem with this world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts".
07:33 PM on 06/17/2012
Someone should remind the church folk that there are recorded Christian blessings of same sex unions documented in every century from the 8th to the 17th. To quote a couple:

From the 11th century , translated from the Greek,
"That these thy servants, X and X, be sanctified with they spiritual benediction, we beseech Thee, O Lord.
That their love shall abide without offense or scandal all the days of their lives, we beseech Thee, O Lord
That the Lord God grant unto them unashamed faithfulness and sincere love, we beseech Thee O Lord"

From the 16th Century,
Then shall he place the holy Gospel on the credence table and those who are to be united shall place their right hands upon it, holding lighted candles
"Behold how good and pleasant it is for bretheren to dwell together in the love of God." etc etc

If you want to rely on the practice of the centuries, might be an idea to familiarise yourself with all of it.

Just saying.
06:58 PM on 06/17/2012
Maybe it is people like you who keep falsely claiming that civil union somehow is inequality that contributes to the problem. No matter how often you say, there is a significant difference between sexual union as enjoyed by same sex and mixed sex couples. When you have to worry about unwanted pregnancy after having sex with a same sex partner, then come and talk to me about equality.
12:19 PM on 06/18/2012
Ok I get it now: the point of marriage is to avoid worrying about unwanted pregnancies.
09:30 PM on 06/20/2012
Dont worry about it - it is probably too complicated for you.
01:39 PM on 06/17/2012
dont characterise people who wear fleeces, a most sensible garment, warm easy to wash and comfortable.Prejudice is prejudice wherever it rears its ugly head
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Zurichilux
A liberal conservative controversialist
10:46 AM on 06/18/2012
they are also hilarious, and show that you have absolutely no dress sense whatsoever.
12:43 PM on 06/18/2012
why hilarious. I wonder what you are proud to wear or wore a few years ago that you would be horrified about now. Led by the nose by"fashion"? The preponderance of fleeces in the population suggests that you are in the minority and thankfully for once practical real values pertain over rudeness and arrogance
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Edgar H
Keep the Press free!
01:00 PM on 06/17/2012
I'm waiting for the first request to hold an Islamic marriage, there are gay Muslims are n't there. Come on Stonewall get on the road to Mecca!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:13 PM on 06/17/2012
To be fair to Pete Tatchell, he's gone to Russia and spoken out against homophobia in Islam. whatever you may think of him or Stonewall, you can't doubt their courage. I think it's something for Muslims to sort out, I can't see Westerners having any success in persuading them to be honest.
06:50 PM on 06/17/2012
You may not have noticed, but there are one or two muslims in Britain !!!! And i dare say one of them is gay. However the trruth is that like feminism, LGBt just dont have the backbome to follow the the real injustices !
It is easy to attack christin clergy and people who beleive in the traditional definition of marriage. Just as it was easy to out gay Bishops !
10:23 AM on 06/17/2012
Puzzled. Most C of E clergy call themselves Gladys and drink pink gin. Now is this post about Jesus and his message of love and tolerance taught by rich bigots, or your "in your face" riposte to school bully? Some of the guys I went to school with are doing 20 years in jail, one or two learned to read.
11:05 AM on 06/17/2012
Hilarious! :-)
11:45 AM on 06/16/2012
And if you'd like to stick your nose into church affairs, you can come along to your local parish church of a Sunday morning and have a word with the vicar afterwards. There might even be tea. Perhaps coffee. But not good coffee. We're not Methodists.

I'm a member of the C of E who disagrees with the Church position on this issue, as on others. But I'm glad that we have a national church that is unafraid to speak out on moral and political issues, even when the stance it takes is deeply counter-cultural. The Church of England may be old, but it is most certainly not "out of touch." Indeed, I think there can be very few institutions in this country as in-touch with the real social and political issues facing this country as the Church of England.
10:22 AM on 06/17/2012
'But I'm glad that we have a national church that is unafraid to speak out on moral and political issues, even when the stance it takes is deeply counter-cultural. The Church of England may be old, but it is most certainly not "out of touch." Indeed, I think there can be very few institutions in this country as in-touch with the real social and political issues facing this country as the Church of England.'

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! I want some of what you're smoking! Keep the vicar, tea, coffee and most of all, the delusion! Thanks but no thanks. I find it so interesting that although you disagree with the Church's obviously bigoted (even to you) position on gay marriage you still go along with it and have the nerve to invite the author of this piece or any other equality-minded person to come along too. It's a bit like saying you disagree with the KKK's violent tactics but you're still a member because they're really very nice people under the bed sheets and pointy hats, so your black friends should come along for tea, coffee and a word with the Grand Wizard afterwards. Do you see how ridiculous it is now? Sorry but sometimes it takes putting the same idea into a different context to jolt one's mind out of its complacency.
photo
AlanDente
Noses: made to hold glasses
07:39 PM on 06/17/2012
This would all be fine if the CofE limited itself to internal affairs.

But it quite clearly, as the official state church, does not.

As an organisation with unelected Bishops in one of our chambers of our legislature. As a church that tries to speak on behalf of people it does not represent.

When this Church busies itself more with the flower arrangements for Lent, then I'll agree that outsiders should butt out!
02:09 PM on 06/14/2012
Thanks, an interesting post, but I can't get past the irony that you've told us all that "If you'd like to stick your nose in, like the C of E did, on gay marriage you can provide your opinion in the Home Office's consultation here" when you've seen the need "to stick your nose in" (so to speak) by publically blogging in the HP. I take your point about people coming to terms with their sexuality and anyone's reaction to that must be respectful and compassionate, no question. But your post does betray a tone more and more prevalent in the liberal leaning media (I'm no Daily Mail reader btw - it's a scurrilous rag) . That is to implicitly pronounce that some debates are over (homosexuality being just one) and it just ain't so. The venom poured out on anyone even looking to even continue the debate on sexuality and sexual ethics is ugly, and frankly shuts down proper debate and deeper thinking. Intellectual bigotry has become part of the scene I'm sad to say. The use of the word "archaic" is interesting too. It's a slapdown pejorative wheeled out now to consign an idea to the dustbin; the views of the CofE regarding sexual ethics are, globally, very much in the majority - just not so widely held on Upper Street. I'm interested in a open conversation - but that isn't that witty or ironic - but it is more interesting in the long run. I don't mean
thebigbike
ran away to be a cowboy
09:12 PM on 06/14/2012
well of course the "debate" on whether "whites" are superior in intellect and capability to "colored peoples" isn't "over " yet and certainly the Intelligent Design versus Evolution "debate" isn't "over" yet. ( sorry for all the quotation marks, but the plain meanings of the words in quotes carry a whole lot of other baggage in the context of these remarks--[plain meaning becomes palin meaning])
10:25 AM on 06/16/2012
With respect, what's your point? You're reinforcing what I've said - from the examples you've chosen you really are saying that for thinking, reasonable people some debates really are over - and the palin dig is symptomatic of the tone I'm talking about. The first example you use is verging on insulting and both examples can be maturely argued on scientific and well reasoned philosophical foundations. Sexual ethics? Not so sure it's so clear cut, and that's why I think the debate isn't over. Thanks for the response, I appreciate it.
10:42 AM on 06/17/2012
Sometimes I think institutions like churches forget that they are dealing with real people and not pieces on a chess board. Some of the most hateful things have been done in the name of following 'principles'. Human beings do not fit neatly into boxes. They are diverse and that is what makes us beautiful and interesting. It is always easy for those who fit into the 'right' mold are concerned, to want to impose their values and rules on those who are different because they are somehow 'wrong'. There is no debate because people are who they are, not who the church wants/tells them they ought to be. I for one am glad that we are moving away from religious edicts in public life, not least because they are more harmful that useful. They destroy people's lives and cause immense pain, all of it completely unnecessarily. I watched a documentary not long ago made by some devout Christian parents who were so against their daughter's lesbian 'lifestyle' that they literally hounded her to suicide and now live with an enormous burden of regret for their attitude and all the suffering it caused. They now advocate for LGBTQ people and have been cast out by their church but they no longer care. They experienced first hand what bigotry can do and they want no part of it. For too many people, the pain just isn't personal, that's why they can keep the 'debate' going until the cows come home.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:15 PM on 06/17/2012
Wise words my friend.
05:22 PM on 06/17/2012
A really thoughtful post and the thought of hounding people or putting people into boxes or treating people like "chess pieces", coldly and dispassionately is abhorrent. But it's just that I just don't recognise any of these from the lives of most Christians I know. Of course there are some unthinking, callous people who speak in the name of religion as there are in all walks of life, but grassroots Christians are often the first people in to help when people's lives hit the buffers and self-lessly get involved in the messiness of life to help those in need. Your word about "religious edicts" is interesting - that they cause immense pain and destroy people's lives is a caricature I'm afraid, in fact, many of them speak about respect, selflessness and putting others before oneself - not characteristics espoused much in modern cultural life but principles many Christians are quietly living out. Take away "religious edicts" and all you have are the sea of other edicts already out there from secular sources. The debate still isn't over I'm pleased to say; thanks again for the post.
11:15 PM on 06/13/2012
This feels like it would be a valid contribution if it didn't briefly acknowledge but then completely ignore that the Church of England/the Church is made up of many individuals who don't deserve to be generalised and condemned any more than any other group of people in society. I'm fully aware that its comedy value is a significant point of the post. It is funny, I laughed first. The argument for equality is right. It will win. It doesn't need anyone to be spiteful, even through comedy, to people who chose to live a different way.
10:54 AM on 06/17/2012
I like the bottom half of your comment but I take some issue with the following section:

'This feels like it would be a valid contribution if it didn't briefly acknowledge but then completely ignore that the Church of England/the Church is made up of many individuals who don't deserve to be generalised and condemned any more than any other group of people in society.'

This is like saying "I'm friends with those people who threw stones at your house and even though I would never throw stones at your house, I don't see any reason not to be friends with them but I don't want you to hold it against me". Churches are pointless without congregations. If so many of you disagree with the Church's stance on equality issues why aren't you standing up and using your enormous collective power to make yourselves heard? If you don't stand up and say you're against something, you are implicitly furnishing it with your approval.
08:56 PM on 06/17/2012
Hi BeFairNow Thanks for your response. Slightly disappointed to find I was grammatically lumped into the 'sit on their back sides doing nothing group' but I do understand the fustration. I meant my key words to be 'individuals' and 'generalised'. There are many people standing up but because they also happen to hold a religious belief they are misrepresented often.
I think that historically most change in our world happens gradually - the few working tirelessly to see the change they know is right. Mass revolution - political, social, moral, religious, etc is very rare and often has as many if not more innocent victims as the 'slow war'. I guess my main issue though is anyone who campaigns for freedoms while using language that appears to indicate someone else should have less of them...
Injustices' are happening everywhere - there are children living in poverty in this country - we haven't all revolted against our governments each time they all promised to solve it but fail. Maybe we should? It just might not be the best way to solve the problem.
Rant over - I just passionately believe that right overcomes wrong, that not all means justify the ends and that tolerance by example could do with a little more profile. I believe we learn more by discussion, debate and learning than we do from trying to enforce anything on anyone else or rubbishing their beliefs. I have yet to meet/hear of a collective group of people all of
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BarryS
03:48 PM on 06/13/2012
Power and money. There is your answer. Remove one and problem solved. Disestablish and refuse financial support.
10:33 PM on 06/13/2012
Take back the Cathedrals they stole in the Reformation and make them non-denominational sacred places for all people.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Edgar H
Keep the Press free!
12:45 PM on 06/17/2012
Very good, however since they belonged to the Roman Catholic Church in the first instance you will have to return them to the rightful owners.
WishfulThinkingRulesAll
Your micro-bio is empty
03:06 PM on 06/13/2012
"When I was at school I was occasionally picked on by kids for 'acting gay' or being camp. I developed a line in riposte which was 'don't bend over then'. I was clearly an amazing child."

Indeed! LOL.
01:48 PM on 06/13/2012
Does CoE make public policy? I think not. But they're entitled to speak their mind. So allow them to have their say. Listen to their views & rants with tongue in cheek. Then press on with more important business (such as ordering the next pint).
thebigbike
ran away to be a cowboy
09:13 PM on 06/14/2012
Of course CofE DOES rely in part on direct public funding......
10:44 AM on 06/17/2012
You do realise that C of E clergy have allocated seats in the House of Lords, right?