John Walker's Electronic House

A while back I emailed a “political” party, the Christian Peoples Alliance (sic), to ask them if they could include an apostrophe in their party’s name. The reply was astonishing. They told me, straight-faced, that they’d focus tested the name and people prefered it with without the apostrophe. Nothing could possibly bring more confidence in local government leaders, eh? Democracy in action!

After some more recent correspondence, I focus tested myself, and it turns out I prefer to spell their name, “Cruel Hatemongers”. Here’s why!

As a result of my request, I found myself on their mailing list. Most of it is mindless local government nonsense, a lot of it is ghastly attempts to prevent Muslims from building mosques, and then this delightful press release arrived:

Gay Adoptions: Sheffield Parents Petition
Council to Exempt their Children

Parents in Sheffield are petitioning the Council to request their children are only placed with heterosexual couples, if it ever came for them to face adoption. Chairman of the Christian Peoples Alliance (CPA) party in Sheffield, former city councillor Sid Cordle MBE, will present the petition – signed by 838 people – on 6th February.

The CPA petition says:

“If ever any children of mine had to be placed into a new family for fostering or adoption I would wish that placement to include both mother and father. Please would the Council take this into consideration when placing children for fostering and adoption.”

On April 6th, government regulations come into force that oblige all adoption agencies, including Christian ones, to comply with the Equality Act in placing children, or lose all access to public funds. The Sheffield parents now want their “gay adoptions advance directive” to be taken into consideration by the Council to ensure their wishes are respected.

The initiative is being taken by the CPA after one of the party’s members, Sheffield magistrate Andrew McClintock, stood down from a family courts panel after he was refused permission to opt out of cases that could result in children being placed with same-sex parents. He had argued that the law extending homosexual rights were in conflict with his religious beliefs and his duty to put the welfare of the child first. Mr McClintock had served on the family panel for 15 years. The party supports his view that children are best placed with heterosexual parents and that adoption by homosexual couples is “an experiment in social science.”

Mr Cordle will tell Sheffield City councillors that children must come first and that parents have a right to conscience:

“No one really knows what the effect of having two fathers but no mother is likely to be. This new regulation seems a risky experiment at a crucial stage of an adopted child’s life. Psychologists still recognise the great importance of a child’s relationship with both parents. Here in Sheffield we want this to be recognised by the Council. A child needs both a mum and a dad and there are at least 800 people wanting their views on this to be paramount.”

“Secondly there is the matter of conscience. People in Sheffield have a right to say that if they were tragically killed in an accident and their children had to be adopted, then their children should go to a father and mother. The rights of same sex couples cannot be so extensive that they override any rights that biological parents have.”

I wrote this in reply:

Dear Sir,

I fear that your current campaign is not nearly far reaching enough.

While obviously children should not be allowed to be adopted by homosexuals (Lev. 18.22), I am deeply concerned that many other
inappropriate couples are being given children to raise, willy-nilly.For instance, it is my belief that councils are regularly awarding adoption rights to potential parents who consume the blood of animals (Lev. 17.14). Also, it has come to my attention that regularly people are being given children despite a habitual practise of wearing clothing of mix fabrics (Lev. 19.19). Nevermind those that eat the fruit of trees on their fourth year of growth (Lev. 19.23).

I believe it is of the upper-most importance that the huge numbers of un-adopted children and babies continue to live in orphanages, the foster system, or abusive and neglectful households, than ever be allowed near these horrific people. The idea that they may be brought up in a loving household that does not have a mother and a father is too intolerable to bear. Far better that they have no parents at all. Thank goodness for you and your efforts – you’re doing the Lord’s work.

Of course, one cannot obey all of the laws in Leviticus – that would be quite ridiculous. They were written for a specific people living in specifically extreme conditions, many thousands of years ago, so one has to apply at least a modicum of sense. I’m pleased to note that Lev 19.18 has not hindered your campaign.

Yours faithfully,

John Walker

Sid Cordle MBE LLB BA MLIA(dip) replied to me. He’s a member of the CPA living in Sheffield, who left the Conservative party after he wasn’t allowed to stand in Sheffield Hallam. He explained in an interview, “It seems that I was too old, white, a Christian, and not a homosexual.” That’s right! Those crazy young, black and Asian athiest gay Tories have completely taken over the party, leaving no room for poor old Sid. He explained to me:

Dear John

As Christians we don’t live by the Old Testatment we live by the New Testament. That is what being a follower of Jesus Christ is all about.

This being the case we take note of Romans 1, Jude, I Cor 6 etc, where homsexuality is called an “unnatural lust”, a “shamelss act” etc. and those who do these things will not inherit the kingdom of heaven.

Of course we believe in forgiveness for all those who have comitted homsexual acts but note in John 8 when Jesus had finsihed with the woman caught in adultery he said to her “go and don’t sin any more” Had it been a man caught in a homsexual act who was brought to Jesus I am certain he would have said the same, “Nether do I condemn you. Go and don’t sin any more.”

If you are a homsexual I would say the same to you. Seek freedom, seek forgiveness and pray God will help you stop sinning. If you want prayer let us know.

Sid Cordle

Aw, he assumed I was gay because I don’t hate gay people – that’s always such a good sign. It’s lovely that he recognises Jesus wasn’t big on condemning people during a campaign to condemn loving gay couples. I knew I’d get exactly this reply. So sarcasm was put aside, and I replied explaining my honest desire for the campaigner’s responses. Ok, sarcasm wasn’t put aside.

Dear Sid,

I very much look forward to reading the press release in which all 838 of your signatories, and all those on your staff working for this campaign, announce their intentions to open their homes to the children and babies who would otherwise be adopted by loving gay couples.

It’s a tremendously exciting thought that you will make this bold stand, where rather than simply imposing your fear and dislike of
certain individuals and their practises upon the innocent children affected, you instead step up and provide the homes for all those who would be left without families were your protest successful.

Obviously as loving Christians, you would never consider being so horrifically cruel as to deliberately eliminate the hopes and
possibilties of abandoned or abused children because of your prejudices, and so will already have this plan put in place.

I anticipate seeing this news published soon.

Thank you,
John Walker

This is the only Christian response that’s valid, as far as I can tell. I am not interested in a pointless argument over whether being gay is extra naughty or not. But I am interested in Christians stepping up if they want to behave this way. You want to prevent others from adopting? Then you fucking well adopt. There’s no middleground on this one. It’s not confusing. It’s not a dilemma. But apparently this doesn’t click with Sid:

I don’t think you understand the situation at all.

1) The total number of signatures is now !,815 (I assume he meant 1,815, but was over-excited)

2) People signing the petition are saying that if they die and their children as a result come up for adoption they want them to live with a father and a mother.

WE are putting the needs of the children first as a massive amount of research shows and also taking note of the wishes biological parents make.

Sid Cordle

Incredible. Because I assumed he would step up and put his money where his homophobic mouth is, he could only think I’d misunderstood his campaign. “We’re not trying to help anyone! Just make things worse! You are a one.” Clearly he wants me to think that they’re only campaigning for an opt-out clause for those who don’t want those dreadful gays raising their children. But it is clearly so much more. The giveaway phrase comes from the initial press release:

The initiative is being taken by the CPA after one of the party’s members, Sheffield magistrate Andrew McClintock, stood down from a family courts panel after he was refused permission to opt out of cases that could result in children being placed with same-sex parents. He had argued that the law extending homosexual rights were in conflict with his religious beliefs and his duty to put the welfare of the child first.

They can lie about their motives, but it’s quite obvious they wish to prevent any same sex couples from adopting. They just don’t have the courage to say so directly.

I’ve replied:

> I don’t think you understand the situation at all.

I have a feeling I do.

> 1) The total number of signatures is now !,815 [I assume he meant 1,815, but was over-excited]

That’s fantastic. Another 1000 homes for unadopted children. This is such wonderful news.

> 2) People signing the petition are saying that if they die and their
> children as a result come up for adoption they want them to live with a
> father and a mother.

And in the meantime, all the unadopted children living in the foster system, orphanages or abusive and neglectful homes can be left to suffer! What a wonderful collection of people you have there. So astonishingly Christ-like.

> WE are putting the needs of the children first as a massive amount of
> research shows and also taking note of the wishes biological parents make.

This is simply untrue. You are putting the *wants* of homophobic or ignorant adults first. If you cared even the tinest amount about children, you’d not be campaigning to prevent their being brought up in loving homes. Clearly if you cared at all about children, you’d be campaigning for more loving couples to adopt. You are doing the opposite. It is your free choice to organise homophobic propaganda campaigns, but at least be honest about it.

Please send me copies of or links to your research. I presume this is not research into the effects of children being adopted by gay
couples, as all that exists somewhat thwarts those wishing to prevent it, proving it to be enormously successful.

Thank you,
John Walker

The saga continues.

If you would like to contact the Christian Peoples Alliance to explain your thoughts, they can be reached here: press@cpaparty.org.uk

To find out more about poor old, white, Christian, straight Sid, check out this interview.