Reader comments · Stonewall Chief Executive denies campaign against David Davis · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Stonewall Chief Executive denies campaign against David Davis

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Robert, ex-pat Brit 17 Jun 2008, 4:31pm

    “Since Labour came to power Mr Davis has voted against the equalisation of consent, the abolition of Section 28 and the rights of gay couples to adopt.”

    No matter one’s party affiliation, Summerskill was right in exposing Davis’ voting record. He has also exposed those in the Labour party who vote similarly. What is the fuss about?

  2. Huh…”how dare we judge Mr. Davis’ reputation by his actions, and not the other way round?!”

    It’s absurd that Stonewall is the one doing the explaining.

  3. 1) “bi-election” ? nice freudian slip there (note to ed: by-election)
    2) voting against gay rights, ie contributing to a culture of homophobia, is not cancelled out by the – I was nice to a poof once – defence. Davis is a bigot. End of story.

  4. Stonewall is a disgrace. It is a New Labour quango that exists only to enable New Labour to bring in new laws to supress freedom of speech by stealth by banging the equal rights drum. David Davies is a hero for wanting to preserve the very freedoms and liberties that Stonewall is colluding with New Labour to remove by stealth. It’s campaign of smears and discreditation against Davies is transparent and deceitful. So bloody what if he voted against an equal age of consent? We are talking about the prospect of anyone of us being interned for 42 days without rhyme or reason. Oh, but that’s only suspected Muslim terrorists, you say. Yes, Muslim terrorists today; easily identified gay men tomorrow. And yes, these laws once passed do creep away with themselves by stealth; just look at how anti-terror laws are now being used to snoop on ordinary people suspected of minor offences. It is for this very reason I will not marry my partner in a civil ceremony: we don’t want our status as gay men to be stored on a government database that can be used against us in the future.

    Gay men have a choice: support Summerskill and his PC-indoctrinated Stonewall cronies and look forward to that knock on the door in the none-too-distant future when George Orwell’s predictions will seem mild compared to the police state that awaits, or wake up and support Davis and preserve the freedoms ghis country fought long and hard for for centuries, not to be sgned away in the flash of a pan by over-hyping a terrorist threat. Because the fact is that you have more chance of being killed in a plane crash than being killed by a suicide bomber!

  5. Robert, ex-pat Brit 18 Jun 2008, 12:49pm

    Rod…you can’t marry your partner in a civil partnership. Stonewall acted on your behalf by telling the government that the vast majority of you didn’t want marriage but something similar and different but definitely not marriage. Obviously Summerskill and others didn’t take the rights of those into consideration who wanted the basic civil right of marriage rather than legal segregation via partnerships to achieve some semblance of equality with married heterosexuals. The two are not interchangeable and not equal, never will be. That’s why the state of California abandoned partnerships for full marriage. Seems that UK gays are unique among other more progressive countries, we’re the only ones in the world who never wanted the right to marry. That will never change as long as Summerskill et al lull themselves into a false sense of equality. To hell with the rest of us and I recently learned that its not high on their agenda, in fact, NOWHERE.

  6. Joe Johnston 18 Jun 2008, 4:06pm

    As usual, Ben Summerskill is using his high profile position to further issues that are nothing to do with gay rights but everything to do with his slavish adherence to New Labour. There are plenty in the Labour party of both the ‘new’ and the ‘old’ version who are no friends to our community but Mr Summerskill doesn’t seem to spend much time attacking them. Surely he realises that gay people have other concerns as well as those issues specifically relevant to our sexuality such as law and order, the economy, the ‘war on Terror’ etc etc and if he is happy to slavishly support the disaster that is the current Government on those issues that’s fine – he is entitled to his opinions – but he is not entitled to imply that he does so as Stonewall’s spokesman. In that role his position should be very clear – it is to promote and support the cause of the gay communities and not his private opinions on other matters.

  7. Joe Johnston 18 Jun 2008, 4:22pm

    Ben Summerskill is part of the New Labour conspiracy and he is disgracefully using his position in Stonewall to promote an agenda which has nothing to do with Gay Rights but everything to do with political correctness as seen by New Labour and his incestuously close relationship with them. He apparently hasn’t noticed yet, but there are plenty in the Labour Party – both of the ‘New’ and the ‘Old’ variety, who are no friends of our communities. It might surprise our Ben to discover that gay people, just like everyone else, have concerns about issues like the economy, the ‘War on Terror’, the ever-expanding reach of Government into the lives of ordinary people and the erosion of ancient rights and freedoms. I take nothing away from the splendid work that Stonewall and its activism have done for us but Summerskill has no right to use his position in Stonewall to promote his own personal political agenda which is what he is doing more and more.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.