Enemies of Reason Poundshop potshots at the media moral maze.

What fucking business is it of yours?

My earlier post about the church being viewed as an important thing by journalists scratching round for a new angle on a murder story was trying to make the point that we give these religious leaders far too much of a source-bias when we put together news stories.

That might not seem such a bad thing if the church was, on the whole, A Good Thing. If it was all Jesus and Mary, lovely and mild, aren't things nice and you should turn the other cheek, then I wouldn't really have a problem. But there is a problem. Religion is not meekness and mildness, I'm afraid. Every now and then, it comes out with a complete crock of shit to suit its prejudices and homophobia, which is eagerly lapped up by the news sources, including the beloved BBC of course.

In a Times letter, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor said the plans were "profoundly wrong" and undermined "the place of the father in a child's life".

Hang on a minute. Here's someone who is not a father and who can never be a father because of his superstition telling us all about how to be a father. What? I'd rather get parenting advice from one of those skiddy rat-dads on the Jeremy Kyle show. What the fuck does a Catholic priest know about fatherhood? It's like me trying to comment about motherhood: As a man, I'm never going to be a mother, so I can only really guess. But it does anger me that this sect of Christianity, with its well-documented problems of child abuse, and the covering-up of child abuse, thinks it's the perfect body to speak about family values - and, worse than that, it angers me that the BBC should think they are the voice of the family either.

The BBC skivvy who cobbled together the article will say to me, "ah Anton, but look it's balanced isn't it? I've got Stonewall's view on the subject as well as the mad old fool in silks. So that makes it all right, doesn't it?" No, it doesn't. Why put the barmy old twat's views first? Who made them more important? Why did you decide that they were more important? Why didn't you ask the cardinal about why, if the Catholic church is so in favour of family values, it covers up child abuse committed by its own priests? It's not a question that is strictly relevant to this article - but it is one of moral relativity. Let's see what the cardinal thinks is more important: saving a priest from being rightly punished by the law for unspeakable crimes against children; or stopping loving parents of the same sex from bringing up a child together. I, for one, would be very interested to hear the response.

Do you remember the other week when I uncovered the bizarre situation of Iain Duncan Smith pretending to be the voice of liberalism when it suited him? Guess what, he's back to form on the issue of same-sex parents and IVF. That's more like it! Forget the centre for social justice, let's just appease the rabid elements of the Tory grass roots. And that's what Duncan Donuts does here:

“Another nail will have been hammered into the coffin of the traditional family,” he wrote. “And another blow will have been struck against fatherhood.

“This move could not have come at a worse time. Just as we are beginning to appreciate the vital role fathers play in the successful upbringing of children, Labour ministers are sending out the utterly wrong signal that fathers don’t matter.”

Does it really send out that signal, do you think? Do you think that the government sat around a table and decided how they could send out the signal that fathers don't matter? Or have New Labour actually done something decent for once and tried to enact a liberal piece of legislation that brings equality to same-sex couples?

I must admit I'm surprised that such a shower of tabloid-fearing shit as New Labour should be able to do something so dangerously, how shall I put this, liberal. Left-wing, even. But right. Now let's see if they'll actually go through with something that will upset the Daily Mail and the usual suspects. For an issue surrounding fatherhood, it will be interesting to see if Labour has the balls to carry this through.

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

Related posts:

1. Links and business
2. Small business bullshit
3. PCC & Jan Moir: business as usual?
4. Fucking Bigtrak
5. I’ve got a fucking cold