|
||||||||
Is Ann homophobic? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#51 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 28,896
|
Quote:
Homophobe
Noun 1. Fear of sameness or men 2. Opposition to homosexuals and/or homosexuality I think they both apply to BoD. It's a lot more encompassing now. |
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#52 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,469
|
Quote:
I think we do privately don't we? Even if AW was the most accomplished dancer in the competition, I would not vote for her because of the sort of person she is. I don't think many people ignore personality and solely consider the dancing.
- The personal views of an ex-politician are more integral to that contestant's "personality" than the personal views of (say) a footballer. - The "personality factor" with Ann is clearly precisely why people are voting for. Unless people think that her dancing is what people are voting for... |
|
|
|
|
#53 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 268
|
Quote:
Yes - there's some clear evidence that she has acted in ways which are consistent with homophobia. That doesn't mean she is, it just means her actions are consistent with such a view.
|
|
|
|
|
#54 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,469
|
Quote:
As I said. Not ANOTHER AW thread! The stuff on this one has been said already on many others. It is getting rather boring. :yawn:
Because, at the moment, those seem to be your only options. |
|
|
|
|
#55 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,751
|
Ann Widdecombe can huff and puff and hold views that are distasteful, but we can choose to ignore her/laugh at her/moan about her, without it making a damn bit of difference to our lives. As she is no longer a politician, she is no longer in a position to influence the law of the land and, to be fair, she has not used her position on Strictly to promulgate her views.
She may well be homophobic, or she may just be narrowly interpreting the Bible, as do many right-wing evangelical Christians. This may not be relevant, but I was sent this by an American friend of mine a while back and it made me laugh: Dear Dr. Laura: Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination ... End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them. 1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians? 2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? 3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense. 4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them? 5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it? 6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination? 7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here? 8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die? 9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? 10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14) |
|
|
|
|
#56 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,726
|
Quote:
Would you prefer a "Wonderful Widdy" thread to be prominent instead?
Because, at the moment, those seem to be your only options. |
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,469
|
Quote:
You'll have to put a few more words round that. It doesn't make any sense. What I am saying is that there are numerous AW threads already. Whatever anyone wants to say (pro or anti AW) fits into an existing thread. There is no need to start another.
Unfortunately, there seems to be a proliferation of pro-Ann threads at the moment. I can't imagine why. So I'm simply trying to restore some balance here. |
|
|
|
|
#58 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: God's own country
Posts: 263
|
Quote:
I completely agree with you on that one.
Unfortunately, there seems to be a proliferation of pro-Ann threads at the moment. I can't imagine why. So I'm simply trying to restore some balance here. |
|
|
|
|
#59 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,726
|
Quote:
Unfortunately, there seems to be a proliferation of pro-Ann threads at the moment.
|
|
|
|
|
#60 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 17,987
|
Quote:
Yes - there's some clear evidence that she has acted in ways which are consistent with homophobia. That doesn't mean she is, it just means her actions are consistent with such a view.
So I guess, to balance this, I wonder, is there any evidence that she is not homophobic? |
|
|
|
|
#61 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,073
|
Quote:
What I am saying is that there are numerous AW threads already. Whatever anyone wants to say (pro or anti AW) fits into an existing thread. There is no need to start another. Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidJames Not only that, but there is rarity value in this thread materialising after he returned from his second flounce. Ah, but this isn't any old AW thread. This is a DavidJames AW thread. No, third flounce.
|
|
|
|
|
#62 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: A posher part of SW London.
Posts: 640
|
May I also propose that AW is a hypocrite? She said at the beginning that she wasn't interested in the 'journey', she wanted to learn "TO DANCE!" (said very vociferously). As pointed out by KH (?), she did start by learning some steps, now she just isn't bothered and focuses on the clowning around. That smacks of hypocrisy to me. The ones on the 'journey' that she so derided are actually LEARNING TO DANCE more than her, despite her earlier pronouncement. Quote:
She may well be homophobic, or she may just be narrowly interpreting the Bible, as do many right-wing evangelical Christians. This may not be relevant, but I was sent this by an American friend of mine a while back and it made me laugh:
Dear Dr. Laura... |
|
|
|
|
#63 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 4,638
|
Of course she is. The woman is a bigot.
|
|
|
|
|
#64 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,469
|
Quote:
Not only that, but there is rarity value in this thread materialising after he returned from his second flounce.
No, third flounce. ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
#65 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pasha's dressing room
Posts: 4,404
|
Is Ann W Homophobic?
Is the Pope a Catholic?
|
|
|
|
#66 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 430
|
Surely she has her right to opinions the same as everyone else.
She has a right to have an opinion on homosexuality and female Bishops and someone else has the right to an opposing view. As for her political views, she was elected to become an M.P. in 1987 and was re-elected by her constituents until her retirement this year. Her electors were well aware of her religious stand point when voting. If we start going down the moral high ground for AW then I also want to know the voting persuasion and religious views of every other contestant too. |
|
|
|
|
#67 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Tannadice
Posts: 11,736
|
Quote:
Ann Widdecombe can huff and puff and hold views that are distasteful, but we can choose to ignore her/laugh at her/moan about her, without it making a damn bit of difference to our lives. As she is no longer a politician, she is no longer in a position to influence the law of the land and, to be fair, she has not used her position on Strictly to promulgate her views.
She may well be homophobic, or she may just be narrowly interpreting the Bible, as do many right-wing evangelical Christians. This may not be relevant, but I was sent this by an American friend of mine a while back and it made me laugh: Dear Dr. Laura: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHaVUjjH3EI |
|
|
|
|
#68 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 158
|
Quote:
Ann Widdecombe can huff and puff and hold views that are distasteful, but we can choose to ignore her/laugh at her/moan about her, without it making a damn bit of difference to our lives. As she is no longer a politician, she is no longer in a position to influence the law of the land and, to be fair, she has not used her position on Strictly to promulgate her views.
She may well be homophobic, or she may just be narrowly interpreting the Bible, as do many right-wing evangelical Christians. This may not be relevant, but I was sent this by an American friend of mine a while back and it made me laugh: Dear Dr. Laura: Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination ... End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them. 1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians? 2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? 3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense. 4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them? 5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it? 6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination? 7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here? 8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die? 9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? 10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
|
|
|
|
|
#69 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,469
|
Quote:
May I also propose that AW is a hypocrite?
She said at the beginning that she wasn't interested in the 'journey', she wanted to learn "TO DANCE!" (said very vociferously). As pointed out by KH (?), she did start by learning some steps, now she just isn't bothered and focuses on the clowning around. That smacks of hypocrisy to me. The ones on the 'journey' that she so derided are actually LEARNING TO DANCE more than her, despite her earlier pronouncement. Tell you what, why don't you start a new thread on it?
|
|
|
|
|
#70 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Tannadice
Posts: 11,736
|
Quote:
Surely she has her right to opinions the same as everyone else.
She has a right to have an opinion on homosexuality and female Bishops and someone else has the right to an opposing view. As for her political views, she was elected to become an M.P. in 1987 and was re-elected by her constituents until her retirement this year. Her electors were well aware of her religious stand point when voting. If we start going down the moral high ground for AW then I also want to know the voting persuasion and religious views of every other contestant too. |
|
|
|
|
#71 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,469
|
Quote:
Surely she has her right to opinions the same as everyone else.
Which is why I've raised this thread as a question rather than an accusation. Quote:
If we start going down the moral high ground for AW then I also want to know the voting persuasion and religious views of every other contestant too.
Quote:
to my mind, this question becomes especially relevant here, for two reasons:
- The personal views of an ex-politician are more integral to that contestant's "personality" than the personal views of (say) a footballer. - The "personality factor" with Ann is clearly precisely why people are voting for. Unless people think that her dancing is what people are voting for... |
|
|
|
|
#72 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 68,698
|
Quote:
Ah, I'm glad you asked that.
![]() Firstly, I'd answer that there are many threads about contestant's personal lives - e.g. the Kara / Artem one recently. So this is along the lines of those. Quote:
Secondly, I'd answer is that the reason Ann is in, is all because of her "entertainment" value. So as this entertainment is all about her personality, it's completely valid to ask questions about that personality.
And here you confuse someone's personality with their personal or religious beliefs. Another couple of separate things.As an attempt at character assassination this thread seems to rank with the best. As another Ann hate thread, it's up there with quite a few others. But in my view such nasty threads have no place in this forum, and have no relevance to SCD itself., |
|
|
|
|
#73 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Not where you are
Posts: 1,263
|
Quote:
Yes, I think the definition of the term 'homophobic' has evolved over time, as words often do.
It's a lot more encompassing now. Anybody know if that Dr. Laura letter was written by Bill Maher? It sounds like him. |
|
|
|
|
#74 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,469
|
Quote:
You seem to be confusing a person's personal life with their personal views and beliefs.
I specifically talked about her actions. And my question was about her personality, based on her actions. Re-read the OP. It was phrased quite carefully. Quote:
Furthermore, just because there seem to be a number of such "personal" threads regarding other couples, it does not justify you creating one in an apparent effort at retaliation.
Quote:
And here you confuse someone's personality with their personal or religious beliefs. Another couple of separate things.
|
|
|
|
|
#75 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,359
|
Quote:
Ann Widdecombe can huff and puff and hold views that are distasteful, but we can choose to ignore her/laugh at her/moan about her, without it making a damn bit of difference to our lives. As she is no longer a politician, she is no longer in a position to influence the law of the land and, to be fair, she has not used her position on Strictly to promulgate her views.
As well as being against gay rights I'd say she is also against womens rights, being anti-abortion, against women priests and in favour of shackling female prisoners in labour. A thoroughly unpleasant woman all round. |
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:46.




