The CoE reverend vs. the militant preaching of homosexuality

So there’s this priest who thinks gay men should have “sodomy can seriously damage your health” tattooed on their backsides. Having written this charming statement on his blog, he’s now claiming it was ‘satire’. I am at a loss as to what he’s satirising, though, and can only assume it’s himself. However, it’s nice to see the Church of England condemning him for being obviously out of his mind. Because God in fact likes gay people, he’s just very homophobic and doesn’t want them near him in heaven. Or whatever. I forget. Anyhow, everyone’s pointing and laughing at the old crazy dude, and that’s a good thing.

This kind of comment is barely surprising, to be honest – old bonkers homophobes in the CoE, who’d have thought – but the dude’s clarifying remarks have a new line of bigotry that’s worth noting:

I certainly have nothing against homosexuals. Many of my dear friends have been and are of that persuasion.

Have been. It’s a choice, you see. Also: points for the brazen non sequitur.

What I have got against them…

See, in my mind this is incompatible with ‘I certainly have nothing against homosexuals’, but that’s me.

What I have got against them is the militant preaching of homosexuality

And thus we witness the death of the word ‘militant’.

To be fair, it was on the way out already. ‘Militant religious fundamentalists’ blow up abortion clinics, while ‘militant atheists’ write books. I would suggest this is not very equivalent, but the entire media would seem to disagree. This is because it lets them off the hook. They really want to report on ‘religion vs. atheism’, but really really don’t want to write about the issues. So they use the standard relativist trick of crying hypocrisy: look, these militant atheists are just as bad as those they’re criticising, isn’t it ironic. It’s the perfect solution: you get to sit in judgment without actually judging anything.

But the Reverend Peter Mullen has gone further and stripped the word of all sense. I’m intigued as to what ‘militant preaching of homosexuality’ would involve, actually, but even excusing the scything of the English language: what the hell is he even talking about? Preaching of homosexuality? That’s happening? Having redefined ‘militant’, maybe he’s doing the same for ‘preaching’ – perhaps it now means ‘anything that brings homosexuality to my attention’. Because I really can’t see any other explanation.

I’m off for some militant sleepytimes now. And before that, some militant toast.