Fuck's Sake

[Conrad]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article6591236.ece#cid=OTC-RSS&attr=2015164

[grammar king mike]

http://www.journalisted.com/lois-rogers

Looks like all this woman writes is bollocks. It doesn't even mention the name of the camp, that's how crap this article is.

[Conrad]

Even so, The Times didn't have to pay her and publish her bollocks. At the very least they could have edited the word groom out of the headline. <--- Epic overreaction

[jimbob_barnes]

Apart from the headline it looks balanced to me. Am I missing half of the article?

[AlexMagd]

Groom = paedophile

There is no way you can separate those words in the mind of the public. That alone should set the alarm bells ringing! Then she goes on to describe it as a camp for atheists, which it quite clearly isn't. It takes the idea of teaching children about the natural world, scientific method and the vital importance of independent thinking into "atheist training camp". Yes, it's an antidote to religious camps, but as with most specifically non-religious initiatives it's looking to transcend that futile debate, not just provide another side.

[ChloeC-F]

this is a new low. Basically Alex said it perfectly. Fucking hell. It's amazing how much shit RD puts up with. I wonder if he'll hit back over this because he doesn't usually.

Team AHS - we must step forward and take up arms!

[Conrad]

Team AHS - we must step forward and take up arms!

Actual militant atheism?? I'm in!

[Chris Worfolk]

Ha yes, since the recent incidients with a certain Middle Eastern religion, I've been fully behind the AHS having a "security arm."

[AlexMagd]

That would save some money too, we could just get someone to keep working out until they had a massive gnarly muscly arm and they could protect us.

Camp Quest have put out corrections which highlight just how shit the article is:

http://www.camp-quest.org.uk/news/response-to-the-sunday-times/