As long as he didn’t go on and on about the “sanctity of marriage”, Mr Barker’s actions are not of public concern.Many pagans such as myself believe that serial monogamy is the natural human condition. The sex of the partners is irrelevant, as people loving people is more important than traditional concepts of gender.However, if something were to happen to his ex-wife, would he wish to have his new partner adopt the children?The only real scandal in this case would be any hypocrisy that has taken place.
Another one bites the pillow
“MPs represent a particular party. The leader of that party decides, through a system called whipping, what the party thinks about issues. The MPs are then directed how to vote by the party leadership.From 2001 – 2003, that leader was Iain Duncan-Smith. It was the “Quiet Man” who ordered his MPs to oppose gay rights legislation. Some did defy him – notably Michael Portillo and current party Chairman, Francis Maude, crossed the floor of the House to vote with Labour. I would not expect a new MP, gay, bi, lesbian or anything else, to defy their party and ruin their career by voting for a bill that, given the huge majority Labour have, would almost certainly have passed anyway. Gay moaners need to try and gain some understanding of how politics actually works. David Cameron, also a new MP, voted against something he believed in. “Pretty cheap for pinknews considering they made a fuss for Gordon Brown missing many votes regarding equal rights for gay people.With Barker, people should understand how it works…hence he can vote against what he believes in just because the Chief Whip said so and if he rebels he’ll have his career ruined (said in another words, he has a careerist).With Brown..who cares how it works as long as Pinknews can carry on with his agenda”It is naive and dangerous for gay activists to expect MPs to vote against the wishes of their constituents and their party just because they prefer boys to girls. “well, if so, some MPs should vote for bring back hanging because people in some constituency would bring it back.”Just like it would be ridiculous for Ruth Kelly to be a Catholic first, a Labour party member and constituency MP second. “you just argued that MPs should represent their constituency wishes..how do you know that Bolton West people want gay equality?
This comment is by far the biggest load of crap I have ever read on Pink News.I’m sorry to see that England has its own form of Log Cabin Republican morons.
“Lesbians in particular seem somehow threatened by women who swing both ways. ” Do you have any research to back that up – Whilst I agree there are still some issues in the LGBT Community around bisexuality I don’t think that women are any more bi – phobic than men!
There appears to be a double standard from Pinknews here. When a government MP votes against or abstains from gay equality legislation they are described as homophobic (e.g. Gordon Brown not being present to vote on gay equality laws). But when a Tory MP votes against or abstains from gay equality legislation they are described as a “party politician.” Pinknews appears to have become politically biased. I hope I am wrong.
“Pinknews appears to have become politically biased. I hope I am wrong.”The general articles seem ok and they usually contain point of views from all parties.But some of the pieces in the opinion/comment sections are biased IMO…probably because they’re the authors opinions.
i think the difference is that Gordon Brown was elected on a manifesto that promised gay rights whereas Tories were not.
” i think the difference is that Gordon Brown was elected on a manifesto that promised gay rights whereas Tories were not”And he has never voted against..he just missed lots of votes..but that’s how politics work (aka top politicians don’t usually attend many divisions). If you want to use the “it’s how politics works”, you should accept it can be used for all.
The skepticism from gays about bisexuals is not the result of gays being too skeptical, it’s the result of there being so damn many homosexuals claiming to be bisexuals because they’re not man enough to be honest and/or they feel that being identified as bisexual is less bad than being identified as gay. Some people measure their manhood by the degree to which they associate romantically, or are perceived to associate romantically, with womenOf course there are bisexuals, there are also ambidextrous people, but the fact of the matter is the majority of people who claim to be bisexual, and/or ambidextrous, are in fact not.Some gay men think that if they’ve EVER had sex with a woman it means they’re bisexual. Some gay men think that if they CAN have sex with a woman it means they’re bisexual. Some gay men think that if they marry a woman it means they’re bisexual. Hell some men think that having passed successfully through a vagina at birth makes them bisexual.Most gay men have at one time claimed to be bisexual. That alone would indicate that true bisexuality is far less common than claimed. It’s not a coincidence that the younger a man is (50), or the more rural he is, or the more conservative he is, or the less educated he is, or the more homophobic his culture is, the more likely he is to identify as bisexual. If you want to get a definitive answer to a man’s actual sexual orientation, instead of what he claims is his orientation, hook him up to a lie detector and ask him about his erotic dreams and ask him what/who he thinks about when he masturbates. THAT is the most effective way to determine a person’s sexual ORIENTATION as opposed to his chosen identifier.Maybe some day when NO gay person feels embarrassed or ashamed to be identified as gay THEN we’ll be less suspicious of those who claim to be bi.
[...] The politics of a personal lifePinkNews.co.uk, UK - 4 hours ago… they were born. Mr Cameron is right to just ignore sniping at his trusted colleague over his personal affairs. The more hysterical … [...]