Evruthin' wis bettur wi' Jesus!

[Intio]

Original story here

SNP under pressure to expel councillor over anti-gay remark
Kenneth Gunn reported to party bosses by MSP after saying on radio show ‘gays are very sad people’

A LEADING SNP councillor has been reported to party bosses by one of his own MSPs after making anti-gay comments on the BBC.

Kenneth Gunn - who is also a Nationalist constituency party chairman - described homosexuals as "very sad people" and said non-believers were "damned to hell".

The outburst prompted a senior SNP MSP, Joe Fitzpatrick, to urge his party to "take action" against his colleague.
advertisement

Linda Jackson, who lives with her partner, Barbara Harrison, in the Borders, has also lodged a complaint about Gunn with the local council.

The row broke out after a BBC radio discussion on a Glasgow exhibition that focused on gay rights in the church. Asked why "non-believers" should treat religious books with reverence, Gunn said: "Well, non-believers are damned to hell anyway, so why should we bother?"

Put to him that he had to live alongside others and show mutual respect, the Borders councillor said: "No, I don't think so. When we all went to church on a Sunday morning and we all prayed to the Lord Jesus Christ every Sunday morning, this was a much better country. Look where it is going now. We have got so-called gays who are really very sad people and we have non-believers and heathens, you know, running the country and running down Christianity."

The SNP appeared to downplay the councillor's remarks by describing his religious beliefs as "personal".

However, e-mails obtained by the Sunday Herald show that the row has reached the top of the SNP.

Jeff Duncan, who rose to prominence for his role in the Save the Regiments campaign, last week e-mailed a complaint to the party's MPs and MSPs, including First Minister Alex Salmond.

He wrote: "Why is it when an SNP councillor makes a very offensive statement on Asians/Blacks he is dealt with by the party leadership promptly and decisively - and why is it when it is an equally offensive attack on gays and lesbians the party defends him/her citing religious freedom? I am dismayed that so far the SNP leadership allowed this to go unchallenged."

Fitzpatrick, the SNP MSP for Dundee West and the party's group secretary at Holyrood, then e-mailed his Holyrood colleagues to say that he had reported the councillor to the party.

Other SNP MSPs also responded to Duncan's e-mail. Kenneth Gibson, the Nationalist member for Cunninghame North, commented: "The individual in question is not an MSP, therefore to suggest this tars' us all with these alleged comments is nonsensical."

Shirley-Anne Somerville, a Lothians MSP who is also an aide to Finance Secretary John Swinney, said in an e-mail: "Can we leave this to you, Joe, given it's a Dundee guy?"

Liz Lloyd, the SNP head of communications, stated: "A response will go to Duncan addressing his concerns."

The row is likely to lead to questions about the SNP's position on gay rights.

The Nationalists' last Holyrood election campaign was bankrolled by Brian Souter, the tycoon who funded a referendum to retain a law that discriminated against homosexuals, while Salmond has argued for exemptions to the law on same-sex adoption.

Green MSP Patrick Harvie said: "Gunn is clearly a disgrace to his party, and if the SNP is serious about building an inclusive, 21st-century Scotland, they will have no hesitation in expelling him.

Claudia Beamish, chairwoman of the Scottish Labour Party, said: "The SNP's failure to immediately condemn Gunn's wild remarks is a disgrace."

Duncan added: "Angus Robertson assured me that the issue was being investigated."

Gunn said: "I understand the offence my statements have caused and apologise for that."

Actual quotes here

Kenneth Gunn's on-air salvo – what was said
THIS is the transcript of Councillor Kenneth Gunn's phone-in conversation with Graham Stewart on BBC Radio Scotland's Morning Extra news show last Thursday.
Callers were commenting on a controversial exhibit at Glasgow's Gallery of Modern Art, which involved visitors being encouraged to scribble comments in the margins of a Bible. Christian groups had complained of obscene messages.

Graham Stewart: Let's go to Kenneth who's in Selkirk.

Kenneth Gunn: Good morning. No, I don't agree with much that has been said on the programme this morning ... you know, this is supposed to be a Christian country ... and, you know, to deface the Holy Bible is sacrilege, just the same as it is to deface the Holy Koran. I've travelled around quite a bit. I have been in Muslim countries ... these are very, very nice people. They take you round their mosques and explain all there is about Islam and they respect the Almighty; they respect the teachings of their church. In this country we seem to have lost that respect totally.

Graham Stewart: But why should this one book be so protected where many others aren't? Ok, I can accept you are religious and many other people are religious, but what about non-believers, why should they treat the book with such reverance?

Kenneth Gunn: Well, non-believers are damned to hell anyway, so why should we bother? We fought holy wars over the last 4,000 years to protect the Bible and, can I say, to protect the Holy Koran as well. If someone doesn't believe in an Almighty being and thinks that man produced everything on this earth, well they are very arrogant people and, as I say, if they are non-believers, they are damned to hell anyway.

Graham Stewart: But this is just a difference of opinion. OK, you believe that, but others will say you are wrong. You have to live alongside other people and have mutual respect.

Kenneth Gunn: No, I dont think so. Just look where this country has gone over the last 40 or 50 years. When we all went to church on a Sunday morning and we all prayed to the Lord Jesus Christ every Sunday morning, this was a much better country. Look where it is going now. We have got so-called gays who are really very sad people and we have non-believers and heathens, you know, running the country and running down Christianity. It seems that, you know, it's offensive to run down Islam, but it's not an offence to run down Christianity. This is supposed to be a Christian country.

Now many Americans (and Canadians?) may be wondering what the fuss is all about, but in the UK this kind of thing doesn't seem as common from our elected representatives, as it is across the Atlantic. I think we, over here, take it for granted that these kind of comments usually come with a southern state accent. The fact that the SNP is a left-leaning party also contributed to my surprise at this - though I feel I'm being naive.

I originally wondered why the Herald had gone with the anti-gay angle (not as if that wouldn't be justified enough) rather than the comments against non-believers, but the main focus of the radio discussion was an art exhibit which highlighted anti-gay bigotry. I also love the classic phenomenon of elderly members of the ethnic majority presuming the right to define when the good ol' days were.

Predictably enough, those who seem most offended that people could scrawl on their holy book, are themselves quite happy to lable others as hell-bound and sad. Precious sensitivity seems to be intimately connected to one's own venom.

I wonder how well he represents those non-believing constituents whom he thinks are going to hell? Has anyone here had correspondance with an elected official who exhibits disregard for those outwith their own beliefs?

[Themightytom]

Oh no, we'd be offended in the US, its just our representatives would probably get away with it.

My parents still think homosexuality is a mental illness despite frequent assurances by the APA that it is not, and to treat it as such has all the characteristics of brainwashing and further generates REAL disorders.

Religion is a free pass to suspend rational thought, critical self analysis and any effort to appreciate or even acknowledge diversity.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Ah, if only people took such umbrage at these sorts of comments in America.

But of course, the vast majority are mindless bobble-heads who nod at anything said about Christianity being the one true religion.

[Simon_Jester]

Well, no, not really. The vast majority put up with it, but the people who actually agree aren't a dominant majority.

When 30 or 40 percent of your nation's population is crazy, there's only so much the majority can do. They have too much political leverage to try to demolish them as a voting/memetic/cultural bloc. They don't just get broken up and dissolved into the mainstream the way that they would in, say, France.* There are too many of them, and sometimes (especially in the places they congregate) they get their way.

It's inevitable, unless you take measures so draconian to make it stop that the cure is liable to be even worse than the disease.
_________

*My impression of French politics is that while there are surely hardcore 'more Catholic than the Pope' fundamentalists in the country, there aren't enough of them to be politically significant

[Dave]

Just a side note, but it would have been nice to mention explicitly at the beginning of the article that "SNP" stands for Scottish National Party. I was completely and totally lost until I got to the end of the article where it mentioned an opposition party's full name.

[Dartzap]

Just a side note, but it would have been nice to mention explicitly at the beginning of the article that "SNP" stands for Scottish National Party. I was completely and totally lost until I got to the end of the article where it mentioned an opposition party's full name.

Best do that when putting GOP and the like in yours, no?

As for the article.... it really doesnt surprise me. Scotland still has a strong religious element to it, you won't find it in the cities a huge amount, but the further north you go, it becomes much more noticable. The recent protests over a sunday ferry service to Skye being an example of that (admittedly there were more people celebrating than there were protesting, but you get the gist)

Still, everyone has nutters.....

[Jade Falcon]

Is this wart a member of the Wee Frees (Free Church of Scotland), because those nutters probably don't even believe in the existence of fire.

The name Brian Soutar might be familiar to some of you, he's the head of the Stagecoach group, a company who has had some rather aggresive business practices by driving other operators out of business.

[Hillary]

Hmm, Nationalist party in display of bigotry. Who'd have thunk it.

The bottom line is that Nationalist parties, by their very nature, are going to attract these sorts. The British National Party are merely more open about their brand of bigotry than the Scots or Welsh Nationalists.

[Jade Falcon]

To be fair, not every member of the SNP or other parties are bigots. Just because some want independence doesn't instantly equal bigot. An example is that the deputy leader, Nicola Sturgeon seems quite reasonable, Salmond however seems like a typical politician and has a smug smirk I'd like to see wiped off his face.

Incidentally, though I'm Scots I don't support Independence, and I'm not even that supportive of the Parliament as in my opinion its a cash sink, not to mention the building is an eyesore.

[Dartzap]

I'm not even that supportive of the Parliament as in my opinion its a cash sink, not to mention the building is an eyesore.

Really? I'd say the outside it a bit odd, what with the pod thingies and the bamboo anti-Old-Firm defences. but inside, its a very nice structure, and the debating chamber is a fairly impressive sight from the stalls (confidental voting? What madness is this?!)

When I went in for a nose around, one of the SNP front bench was giving a talk to what I suspect was someone from the Japanese embassy about its advantages over Westminster palace. Lots of hand gestures involved....

[Jade Falcon]

It's mainly the exterior I'm talking about, it has too much of a chaotic look for my liking, but then again I like a lot of architecture like art-deco style, or some earlier. Maybe not too fancy, but its my own taste.

[Intio]

Hmm, Nationalist party in display of bigotry. Who'd have thunk it.

The bottom line is that Nationalist parties, by their very nature, are going to attract these sorts.

That's the kind of generalisation that the BNP (an overtly racist political party) actively wants you to make. They've been caught, in the past, trying to draw equivalency between the SNP and the BNP, so as to give themselves a veneer of false legitimacy. The depressing thing is, not just from your comment, that it sometimes works. I've heard people querying why the SNP is taken seriously and given media attention, whilst the BNP is not treated in an equal way. Do people really stop thinking once they hear the similarities in names?

Also, the SNP actively courts ethnic communities - yes for mercenary electoral reasons - so I can't see how they "by their very nature, are going to attract these sorts". Or perhaps, nowhere near to a comparison with the BNP. If anything unionist parties (union of Britain for non-British readers, not those unions) have a demonstrable track record of attracting "these sorts".

Grrr, now I sound like a rabid SNP supporter.

The British National Party are merely more open about their brand of bigotry than the Scots or Welsh Nationalists.

Wow. Evidence? Invective is subordinate to demonstrable record.

[Eleventh Century Remnant]

The Society of Nose Pickers is, well, obviously, a Scottish nationalist party- but that really is about the only thing they all have in common.

They're a single issue party, when you get right down to it, and have an embarrassing tendency to accept anyone and everyone who agrees with them on the issue of Scottish independence, no matter how far out on the lunatic fringe they may be on the rest of the issues.

I'd describe the SNP's grass roots support as diverse, covering the spectrum from people who probably would count as neo-fascists if they were wearing brown shirts instead of blue to ex- members of the Communist Party of Great Britain; unfortunately, courting this support results in a party that is essentially schizophrenic, and wide open to charges of hypocrisy and bandwagon following.

Ideologically, to be honest I'm not entirely certain. They're certainly not rabid right- actually, it would be much more interesting if they were. They're trying to be all things to all people, and making promises based on god knows what- I'd say they make noises like authoritarian left, but in local councils and in practise, they tend to make it up as they go along, whatever the local situation and the local MSP and councillors will stand.

In what power they've gained, I'd say they have been generally ineffectual and a poor argument for their own case; what general British, European or global disasters have they managed to mitigate, or avoid?

[Jade Falcon]

I'd describe the SNP's grass roots support as diverse, covering the spectrum from people who probably would count as neo-fascists if they were wearing brown shirts instead of blue to ex- members of the Communist Party of Great Britain; unfortunately, courting this support results in a party that is essentially schizophrenic, and wide open to charges of hypocrisy and bandwagon following.

I'd personally say that those sorts are more attracted to the Scottish Socialist Party and that other bunch of nutcases, Solidarity myself (the Scottish party called Solidarity, not to be confused with the Polish party).

[Hillary]

Initio -
I stand by the assertion that nationalist parties will attract this type of bigot. The SNP bang the drum loudly for Scotland and the Scots - by doing so they will inevitably appeal to those who feel that the Scots are God's own people and everyone else is somewhat inferior. That this boils over into racism and homophobia is not exactly a giant leap, regardless of the party's official line on minorities. My experiences of Plaid Cymru supporters (half my family is Welsh) have shown me this.

My comments about the party itself were unwarranted and I happily withdraw them.

[Intio]

I think you're right that the party may attract these types, but I read your comments as the party consciously seeking them. It was your comment that "The British National Party are merely more open about their brand of bigotry than the Scots or Welsh Nationalists" that surprised me, as it seemed to draw equivalency between the two; though I see you have withdrawn that.

I think Eleventh Century Remnant brought up good points. I'd always seen the SNP as a leftist pary trying to shed the 'one-issue' image, though I appreciate his view that in order to draw supporters they were far less discriminating than they should have been. I wonder how much of stongly right-wing influence lies within the party.