Slaveheart

“Management” found a new game at her workplace on Friday – taunting exiled Scots who, if they had a chance, would have voted No anyway.
As she so aptly put it, “I hear Mel Gibson's making a modern sequel to Braveheart . It's going to be called Slaveheart.”
Ouch! But couldn't you just predict that, once finally given a chance, all those Presbyterian dullards would opt for an English Nanny over free choice and responsibility?
A fear of freedom perhaps? I blame John Knox myself. Once you've internalised the doctrine of Predetermination, maybe you can never think and act for yourself.
If you do have enough self-respect to get involved in a major contemporary political issue, get down to the Manx Legion Club in Douglas tomorrow night (Monday 22^nd) for this (see http://positiveactiongroup.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=518:pag-public-meeting-disability-and-equality&catid=34:pag-meet ).
Gareth and Paul are two of my favourite Manx human rights activists. Since coming here just a year or two ago, Gareth has galvanised the whole local debate over disability and moved it on decades. As in the UK until the 1990's, it used to be dominated locally by patronising faith-led “charities” who would do anything to help the disabled except get off their backs and stop using them as an excuse for lifetime subsidised employment. Gareth, by comparison, has a practical grounding in the Disability Rights Movement, the kind of militant crips who, if you lay in a bath of baked beans to buy them a wheelchair, would quite rightly smack you in the mouth instead of thanking you.
Paul has been slogging away for as long as I can remember on equality issues. He was key to the abolition of the vacuous Section 38 (the Isle of Man's equivalent of UK section 28, which prevented schoolteachers assuring kids that there is nothing abnormal about homosexuality or gay relationships) and to various moves to abolish institutionalised Manx homophobia in the 21^st century. More quietly, he was the sole advocate prepared to help two Muslim guys refused bail because they could and would not attend daily prayer meetings at the island's bail hostel, run by a Christian charity. The case was also important because the Manx government's answer to the first local request for asylum was going to be to quietly ship them back to the UK and pretend the applicants had never been here, thus ensuring a legal judgement would not be made and a legal precedent could not be set.
But while Paul and Gareth will raise valuable issues, this Equality Bill is a much bigger deal and we all need to be thinking about how it might affect us.
For example, luckily I was married in a civilised country, and if my daughter ever gets round to being married or entering a civil partnership I will want the same for her. As long as a superstitious cross-dresser, calling on his imaginary invisible friend as witness, is deemed to be a fit person to pronounce her legally married but a responsible and rational adult is not that ceremony is unlikely to take place on the Isle of Man. I will advise her to go to Scotland or the Irish Republic instead.
Similarly, we all have to pop our clogs sometime, and I would rather my friends do not suffer the indignity of seeing me off in a room dominated by the amanita muscarita-inspired ramblings of ancient Middle Eastern goat herders, thank you very much. Some will say that as I will be dead at the time it does not matter, but, honestly..... Yuk! I would not EVEN be seen dead in a drab dump where the furnishings are that tacky, P-U-L-L-E-E-A-S-E!!!!
Maybe we should all get serious...or maybe not. When even some of my loved ones' jokes bear more serious analysis than what passes for the serious contemplations of the average Manx politician it may only be necessary to be awake, laughing and active to make a difference.

Whinge if you're glad to be sad

I suppose I have to make some comment on what is passed off as a ‘response’ to a UK government consultation about gay marriage by the island’s Anglican area manager (see http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/isle-of-man-news/bishop-s-view-on-marriage-reform-1-4654915 ). But, really, is there any point?

Oh well, then….

Firstly, the Bishop of Sodor & Mann has never had a right to sit in the House of Lords, but is the only bishop in the British Isles who, of right, sits in the upper assembly of another government. It is therefore a little puzzling - and more than a little rude - that he feels able to submit an opinion to the Westminster government when he is not governed by that country's laws, but is an unelected member of another country's government (and an unpopular and unwanted one at that).

Secondly, prior to his appointment as Bishop of Sodor and Mann, Paterson was personal chaplain to John Sentamu. He was chosen as the Manx bishop at a private meeting, attended only by three tame Manx politicians and three senior clergy, which was chaired by John Sentamu. Unlike the standard process for selecting a bishop - whereby Lambeth puts up two candidates and the selection committee chooses - his was the only name considered. Draw your own conclusions as to his ability to either act or express a theological opinion independently of his former 'line manager' (who, of course, was over here on a week long visit last month).

Third point, if you want to know what he actually said to his fast diminishing flock, go to http://resources.pihomebuild.com/sites/713/docs/www_1207.pdf .

Fourth point, he didn’t even come up with this guff. The ‘suggestion’ of introducing vows into civil partnerships to avoid having to introduce gay marriages is lifted wholesale from the Christian Institute. The rubbish about maintaining a distinction between ‘civil’ and ‘religious’ marriage is another direct lift, this time a CARE argument made when the Scottish marriage act changed a few years back.

Bottom line – both Christian fundies and the leadership of the larger churches (but not their general membership) are bricking it because when gay marriage is introduced in the UK (and it will be) the position of churches becomes even weaker – even if by some miracle they manage to bluster a way out of having to let those religions, Christian denominations and clergy who want to offer legally binding ceremonies to gays do so.

Think about it. What is the point of the churches being allowed to carry out ANY legal ceremony of commitment if they cannot - or will not - conduct them for most people, or even recognise that the vast majority of people’s chosen legally binding ceremony is the real deal?

They will, quite rightly, become even more of a laughing stock in the eyes of the general public than they already are, and there will inevitably be pressure on the UK government to finally remove the ridiculous privilege which allows them to pretend they are fit to rubber stamp any adult relationship as ‘legit’.

So can I just leave it at that?

Because a little while ago I vowed never again to knowingly add to the sum of misery in the world, and even having to acknowledge the dishwater dull ‘judgements’ outlined at the links above by this terribly sad man is depressing to anyone with more than half a braincell. Religion, politics and commerce are all sources of misery by the bucketful, and frankly, I cannot bear to consider them ‘seriously’ unless I have a VERY large bucket close to hand.

And incidentally, I know the 21^st century gay community goes to great pains to stress they are now just as drab, and lead just as dismal and pointless lives, as everyone else. But I still think any gay couple who want to get married in a church should be reported to the Taste Police. Because some things are just so tacky they cannot even be passed off as camp.

Sod Manx marital apartheid. Get hitched in a civilised country instead

What passes for a Manx media is all of a twitter over the idea that two hotels have been licenced as wedding venues(see http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/isle-of-man-news/two_hotels_get_licences_to_host_marriage_ceremonies_1_4129915 ).
….and this is progress because…….?
Bottom line is that we still suffer from a system of marital apartheid on the Isle of Man.
Absolute bottom line - if you believe in magic a bloke in a dress can legally marry you in a ceremony where all sorts of flowery language and music can be (and often is) incorporated, asking his Imaginary Magic Friend to bear witness. If you’re slightly more rational you can only be legally married by a civil servant, and if you depart from the dull as ditchwater script by so much as a word it is null and void.
Why, exactly, is it an improvement that you can go through this grey charade in a hotel rather than some small town government office?
The funniest thing is that, thanks to the continued bigotry of some church leaders, the only people who now have total equality in marriage are gays and lesbians. Because they, and only they, can only be legally hitched in a civil ceremony. Following that they are free to either find a liberal priest who will bless them or to make up their own imaginative ceremony according to what they hold most dear. Religious or secular, that ceremony makes no difference, because only the civil ceremony which proceeds it is legally binding.
This is exactly the same circumstances as I experienced, years ago, for my wedding in Hungary where, like many European countries, it is a normal, common sense notion that the state presides over some token rubberstamping of your relationship to make it all legal, then you go off and do it as quietly or spectacularly as you like in a ceremony which means something special to you and those who matter most to you, even if it’s pure nonsense to everyone else.
So if you’re not gay and you’re getting married, take my advice. Sod waiting around for this third world ruritanian backwater to join the 21st century. Set a date with these guys (see http://www.humanism-scotland.org.uk/ceremonies/index.php ), then take a break in Scotland and get legally married in style – and most importantly in a ceremony that means something to YOU – in a country which doesn’t treat the huge rational majority like kids with special needs.
Just do it.
You KNOW it makes sense. You KNOW you deserve it.

All Frilly Surplice And No Knickers

One of the dimmer Tynwald layabouts had some objections to the Marriage and Civil Registration (Amendment) Bill which went through in April. Apparently the chump was worried it might lead to a spate of ‘wacky weddings’ which would make the outside world laugh at the island.
Oh Eddie, really! The world laugh at a place populated by folk who not only let you take executive political decisions while skulking in a government broom cupboard but even pay you, even though you can’t get elected? As if!!
The sadder thing was that the main hold-up to a fairly modest bill was the Bishop needing an assurance (which he got) from fellow unelected political rejects and chancers that if a clergyman was to be illegally passed information from a confidential register of transgendered people, and refused to conduct a marriage of that person, then neither the clergyman nor the faith-biased and homophobic civil servant would be prosecuted.
Some people wonder why I laugh when Manx church leaders or government departments try to tell us they want to stamp out racism, sexism or homophobia.
But a few weeks ago I noted another blatant example of the kind of tasteless tat that passes elsewhere for a ‘dignified’ church ceremony. Take a look at http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/847874-dog-gets-elaborate-church-blessing, where some herbert spent £1,000 having his dog blessed in a village church. And there was me thinking those ‘bring your pet to church’ Sundays local bunny-huggers love so much were a bit over the top.
It does make you wonder about all those Manx church pretensions to high mindedness and solemn dignity. As one of the more personable senior clergy once grumbled to me over a decade ago, he’d never known a place like the Isle of Man for rich, thick and sentimental punters, and church advisors who’d sign him up to fulfil their oddest whims at the right price. “Anything that can’t run away, they want me to pray over. If it’s got legs, wings or fins I’ve been asked to christen, marry or bury it. If it doesn’t move they want me to bless it.”
By comparison, I’ve yet to hear of any Manx gay couple with such poor taste that they wanted to get married in a church. Some people just have to much taste, and self-respect.
Which makes Manx Christian objections to gay marriage ( and even the long overdue, yet to be implemented, arrangement for civil partnership ceremonies) all the more risible.

Quakers say 'Yes' to gay marriage while Manx can't even say 'When' for civil partnerships

One of the newer links on this page is to the Christian thinktank Ekklesia – a small oasis of good sense in the intellectual faith desert.
Symon Hill, associate director of Ekklesia and a Quaker, commented on 2nd August:
“I trust this decision will inspire people of all faiths and none who are working for the inclusion of gay, lesbian and bisexual people. As with other churches, this has not been an easy process for Quakers. I hope that others will have the courage to follow this lead and speak up for the radical inclusivity of Christ. As Christians, we are called to stand with those on the margins who are denied equality”.
Symon’s comment followed last week’s decision of the Quakers' Yearly Meeting in York to fully affirm the principle of same-sex marriages, not just give the nod to civil partnerships. For some two decades now Quakers have without fuss blessed same sex unions during their meetings, and remain the only Christian denomination to not only do so but to want to conduct legal Christian civil partnerships as well as heterosexual marriage ceremonies.
Meanwhile, here in Europe’s Third World, where we still await even a vague date for a basic Civil Partnership Bill, we can only marvel.
But then, Manx Christians still don’t recognise Quakers as ‘proper’ Christians anyway. The executive level of Churches Together in Mann remains an airtight ghetto where just four distant patriarchs decide and pronounce the ‘official’ beliefs of the many they claim to represent. While CTIM loves to take the credit for a Quaker-led Manx landmine clearance project, the woman who ran it had to be given a special associate status to a CTIM sub-committee in order to make things official.
In turn, we have no real idea how these grey and ghastly ‘church leaders’ come to agreement with equally grey, equally distant senior politicians over new laws and continued Christian privilege.
They just do, and we just suffer the consequences.

Equal rites, or just marital madness?

Thank goodness for Brenda Cannell – the only MHK with the gumption to ask an obvious question. i.e. ‘Why SHOULD the clergy's right to refuse to perform a marriage ceremony for a transsexual be enshrined in law?’
Sadly, she doesn’t appear to have actually asked it during the Keys debate. Even sadder, her colleagues wasted time with far dumber questions. See http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/Clergy39s-rights-over-transsexual-weddings.5015015.jp for more.
For example, Geoff Corkish, the duly elected timewaster for Douglas West, who asked: 'Given that a member of the clergy cannot be compelled to conduct a marriage service where at least one partner has changed sex, if the person concerned withholds that and you can be fined £5,000 for making an un-authorised disclosure, doesn't this constitute a fine for telling the truth?'
Geoff, I know you used to do PR for the Steam Packet, so you have all the intellectual capacity of a short plank, but the answer is ‘No, it’s still illegal, even for an over-privileged, cross-dressing, superstitious windbag’.
Furthermore, the very purpose of the bill is to ensure the basic human rights of transsexuals, including the right to marry, therefore a transsexual has no need to give ammunition to a certified bigot, and it is none of said certified bigot’s damn business anyway.
Got that?
Actually, the more I think about it, the more I wonder why any sane person chooses a church marriage.
Think about it – if you were signing the contract to buy your home and the advocate started talking to an imaginary friend, what would you do? Even amongst Manx advocates (some of whom are demonstrably unbalanced and only in practice because of family ties), such behaviour will get you a stay in a nice room with padded walls.
Yet we think nothing of it when (sometimes not even with a shotgun pointed by an angry father) adult couples legally commit themselves to a lifetime together at a ceremony overseen only by a bloke who asks them to make their pledge using a fictional character as their witness.
If you think there’s equality before the law in the Isle of Man, let’s test it.
Try getting married here by a bloke dressed as a white rabbit, using Winnie the Pooh as your witness.