Talk:Christian Voice (UK)

Christianity Start‑class Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ahem, this kind of religeous hatred on wikipedia is embarrasing. Please delete this whole sorry page.

Why Gaelic?

If I can lift the tone of the discussion a little, without being offensive or confrontational, why have they got it in for an entire language, Scottish Gaelic? What is so offensive about Gaelic that it threatens their interpretation of Christianity, and does this hostility extend to Irish Gaelic and Welsh? 80.177.253.74 (talk) 11:12, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be part of a long rant about the costs he owes as the result of a legal action - he's taking a swipe at a large range of things as well as salaries of top presenters - I'm not sure if he's said anything else about Scottish Gaelic. Autarch (talk) 15:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't seem like they're specifically opposed to Scottish Gaelic broadcasts from that release. Otherwise you'd also have to say they're opposed to the new BBC logo, BBC 3 and 4, and paying presenters large salaries. 98.223.229.165 (talk) 17:45, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

Sometimes I hate NPOV. This bunch in general and Stephen Green in particular are fucking assholes.

Amen, dude.

Agreed. They're scum. They're basically the American Bible-Belt style Bible Thumpers, but right here in the UK. It's really tragic. It especially annoys me over Jerry Springer the Opera, which is fantastic. If you dont want to see it, fine, but dont attack people for wanting to, and dont judge them or the theatres, your own GOD says that you arent to judge, only him, so instead of hanging around outside theatres telling me Im going to hell for being gay and watching Jerry Springer, and forcing cancer charities to refuse money raised by Jerry Springer the Opera, instead just get lost, go do something like feed the homeless instead of wasting your time, AND stopping charities accepting money.

Scum.

Why hate NPOV? All NPOV means is that assertions need to be supported by evidence. If Christian Voice is a bunch of spiteful bigots - which I believe they are - there is no reason why it can't be demonstrated from an NPOV, ie with evidence. David L Rattigan 10:29 03 May 2006 GMT

Agreed, they're worthless scum. Fuck them. Luckily no one intelligent pays attention to their fucking evil work.

Personally, I think that listing their acts in the encyclopedia shows them for the narrow-minded bigots they are. I'm particularly thinking of the cancer charity that was intimidated into declining a donation from a production of Jerry Springer: the Opera. Autarch 21:20, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think they are THAT bad. But they are very misguided, ignorant and stupid people. But Hey Jesus loves them! One thing I do like is their article attacking the BNP on their website. They call them a bunch of "racist, paganist, evolutionist, volk-worshipping Nazis"!

i am afraid to say i cant find any evidence that they are against tolerance, peace and friendship between members of different faiths. in fact i dont think this is true, although there is evidence that they dont think highly of Islam and Hinduism. they did apparently express admiration at those Sikhs who protested that play in Birmingham. So i dont think they hate people of other religions or races. i dont even think that they hate gay people as such, but they certainly arent compassionate or understanding of the gay community.

I've removed the neutrality alert, as the issues I raised here (and which someone has subsequently deleted) have mostly be dealt with. FrFintonStack 15:38, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"For example, they object to the proposals to end the practice of male-preference primogeniture for the succession to the Crown of the United Kingdom [1], which they believe would reduce the tax burden on families to encourage fathers to provide and mothers to care for their own children."

This is something of a non-sequiter. Has something been removed between "Crown of the United Kingdon" and "which they believe"? FrFintonStack 15:38, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These people are cunts. In the most offence sense of the word imaginable.

I can only agree with the unsigned assessment above (indeed, it ranks as generous praise compared to my opinion of CV) but why is this ghastly organisation deserving of such a massive article here? The Christian Institute, another selection of vile bigots, has a way smaller article and yet is more notable. I am all for exposing the activities of mad-eyed loons like CV, but does it really warrant this much server space? 81.151.37.228 17:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit

Mostly tidying, but some poorly sourced material commented out (original retained in source text). These arose mostly (oh the irony!) from a rather literalistic and partial reading of Christian Voice's statements. Yes, they are an embarrassment to Christianity, but let's not fall into the same black/white trap! Material related to UK Life League commented out, not least as it has been deleted from the UK Life League page where it would better belong 84.92.241.186 22:35, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trim

I hope this will not prove too controversial: I have significantly trimmed this article. It's length was (IMHO) absurd compared to the CV's (lack of) importance, and, worse, it regurgitated many of the CV's comments. We're not here to put CV's views on display for them! :-)

The article remains, I feel, too long, but... 86.153.93.235 (talk) 15:35, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Christian theology and speaking to the group - POV?

The following phrase appears: the Moderator of the General Assembly of the United Reformed Church called Christian Voice "a disgrace" without speaking to anyone in the group first, as required by Christian theology. Could anyone point to which aspect of Christian theology involved or which denomination would be relevant? As a former Christian, I've never heard that claim been made before - it may be an interpretation of some aspect of Christian scripture, but it definitely seems POV. Autarch (talk) 15:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed it; it's nonsense, and unreferenced. I've also removed the statement about thier positions ranging from far-left to far-right. I've never heard anything that would indicate that they are remotely left-wing (other than a single sentence that working men should be unionised), and while most of their policies could literally be described far right, that term has taken on close associations with racist/neo-fascist movements. While CV are clearly contemptable, I think racism is one of the few forms of bigotry they are not guilty of (qualified praise for Enoch Powell aside). I think it best to simply state their positions, and leave the readership to make up their own minds as to where on the political spectrum they lie.81.139.117.111 (talk) 16:14, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]