Thanks to Bloggers4Labour for posting this most sensible comment (above) on what descended into the most pathetic slanging match between Sharpener commentators Andrew and Blimpish and myself over the subject of abortion.
I don't absolve myself from blame in this, because I was naive to go into a debate like this with all guns blazing. However, hopefully I can sum up the 1% of light that has come out of this.
Firstly, I'm not going to let them get away with slandering my reputation.
My comments on religion were; 'because the majority of people who are anti-choice on abortion are influenced by religion their arguments are invalidated'.
In no way is that bigoted, to compare this comment to a BNP supporter as Andrew does is plainly ridiculous.
I think its about time people realise that views like Andrews' and Blimpish's on abortion are offensive. Just look at how Andrew belittles women in his post 'joking' they should turn Lesbian if they want to avoid getting pregnant. This is not funny. If anyone is the bigot it is him for posting such obvious rubbish in what he claims is a 'serious' post.
He compares me to the bigotry of the BNP but has a link to the fascist website 'cross of st george' on his Sharpener blog.
I think by looking at his posts and comparing them to mine it is quite obvious who is closer to the BNP. I'm not the one advocating banning abortion, pro-capital punishment, against immigration, pro-guns etc..
Believe you me, I have 'debated' with the people on 'CoSG' and it rarely gets above the level of 'I hate brown people cos they smell' arguments! This is the people Andrew is siding with.
Andrew has got so muddled about his inconsistency in being anti-choice on abortion and pro-death penalty that he nows claims he never said that 'innocent life should be saved if possible', in which case where does that leave his argument for saving zygotes (even if you believe his ridiculous argument that they are equivalent to humans).
On religion, I don't think religious views deserve respect because they are plainly absurd.
Rational people should base their views on what the evidence supports not just 'what cannot be dis-proved philosophically', otherwise you can believe anything and whats the point in that?