Saturday, 9 June 2012

Christian Medical Comment – 300,000 page-views

Christian Medical Comment (CMC) was launched in December 2009 but I started blogging regularly in September 2010.

Overall there have been 447 individual posts and just over 300,000 page-views – at an average of about 670 views per post.

CMC has been ranked in the 20 top UK blogs in the Religion and Belief category in the e-buzzing rankings for the last twelve months, peaked at 3rd in March and currently stands at 7th. It ranks 241st overall amongst ebuzzing’s over 210,000 registered blogs.

CMC is a specialist blog majoring on issues at the interface of Christianity and Medicine with specific focus on the beginning and end of life. But my broader aim is to bring issues to the attention of Christians that I believe they should be informed and concerned about.

I write mainly for a Christian readership but many of my readers hold strongly opposing views and frequently take issue with my views.

60% of readers come from the UK, 17% from the US and 7% from Canada, Australia, Germany, Russia and Ireland combined with the remaining 16% coming from other countries around the world.

I’m particularly grateful to those other blogs which republish some of my posts giving them wider distribution (especially Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, Mercatornet, Anglican Mainstream, Care Not Killing, LifeSite News, National Right to Life News and the Official CMF blog) and also to the Christian Institute, Westminster2010 and Christian Concern which frequently link to or quote from them.

My ten most viewed all time posts are as follows:

1.Ten reasons not to legalise same-sex marriage in Britain
2.Fantastic interview! Rev Cooper, chaplain to Chile’s president, gives glory to God on Radio Five Live about God’s hand in rescue of Chilean miners
3.Do you object to being labelled 'homophobic' when you are actually just 'homosceptic'?
4.Twenty facts we did not learn from Terry Pratchett’s BBC ‘documentary’ on assisted suicide in Europe
5.Twenty questions atheists struggle to answer
6.Ireland victory makes North-South rugby world cup final look a near certainty
7.Peter Tatchell comes clean that homosexuality is neither biologically determined nor fixed
8.Powerful arguments advanced in UK parliament for a change in the law to ensure properly informed consent for abortion
9.New C4EM online petition supports incest, bigamy and marriage of minors. Oops!!!
10.Hospital kills ‘wrong’ twin in selective abortion – both babies now dead


  1. I think you should be ashamed of yourself.

    On the one hand you say you believe in Jesus, who we are told had very tolerant views, yet this blog just preaches hate and intolerance.

    This blog is homophobic, misogynistic and is a testament to the Christian faith.

  2. Thanks NE. Nice of you to drop by.

    What do you mean exactly by 'tolerance'?

    1. Really?
      1.a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry.

    2. sorry, messed the link up...

      1.a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry.

    3. OK. So the essential element is a permissive attitude to 'people' rather than to 'ideas' or 'opinions'?

      This is a very important distinction.

      A la Voltaire, who said (my paraphrase) 'I may disagree with your opinion but I will strongly defend your right to express it'.

      So a good example might be a Christian doctor who owns a blog yet allows other people who strongly disagree with him (eg. atheists, gay activists, pro-choice advocates, euthanasiasts etc - including those who never personally identify themselves but hide behind pseudonyms) to express their strong opinions on it. In fact he even politely engages with them in debate without swearing, shouting, getting angry or insulting them - although at times he might tease them just a bit.

      Yes? :-)

      But what tolerance most certainly not is treating all opinions as equally valid. Don't expect me to do that. Jesus most certainly did not.

    4. As I said: This blog is homophobic, misogynistic and is a testament to the Christian faith.

      A lot of what you post here is melted down hate speech eg claiming to be homo-sceptic*, wishing to stop women from doing what they like with their own bodies, forcing people who are in extreme pain to keep on living. You may not even think you are being hateful, but its clear to any onlooker that you are.

      *Homo-sceptic: Used to suggest that people who are gay have some choice as to whether they are gay or not - used to dehumanise and belittle those in the gay community - just reading your description of the word makes me feel ill:
      Quote:I’d like to broaden this definition to include ‘being sceptical about the key presuppositions of the gay rights movement’ such as the beliefs that:

      • Homosexuality is genetically determined
      • Homosexual orientation is always fixed
      • Sexual orientation is a biological characteristic like race, sex or skin colour
      • Feelings of same sex attraction should be welcomed and acted upon
      • Offering help to those who wish to resist or eradicate these feelings is always wrong

      wrt Voltaire's words, I have given them a lot of consideration over many years and I do not believe he was right. There are many cases where the right to voice an objectionable opinion should be curtailed, indeed in some member countries of the EU they have taken the steps to prevent right wing extremists from suggesting that the holocaust didn't happen and its right and proper that they have done so. I think you are as wrong here as you are in many of your thoughts.

      So, tolerance; its something that is clearly missing from your personal world view.
      If you were truly tolerant of others you:
      • wouldn't use this blog to try and promote the hate that comes from your bible.
      • wouldn't be homo-sceptic, you'd be gay-ok. (my attempt at a new word!)
      • would realise it isn't your place to suggest whether women should have abortions or not.
      • wouldn't tell others how they should die.

      The one thing that this blog clearly shows is that you are not very tolerant at all.

  3. How is the blog misogynistic? Do not be foolish. If someone is against abortion, that is pro-children, not anti-women. In fact, women who kill their own children in the womb could be said to be child-haters.

  4. It was fourteen years ago when a psychology student opened a Bible and told me that I was to be one of the Two witnesses, the last two prophets that are going to come and judge the world before Jesus returns.



Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.