“homosexuality was inferior to heterosexuality, and could be dangerous for humanity.”
So this does not go beyond the limits of freedom of expression?
Well fine – why then if you substiture the word homosexual for black person or Asian person or disabled person this would NOT be covered by freedom of speech. I hope the gays in France start writing to the UMP to sack this bigot.
This type of neo-facist behaviour and speech is very dangerous.
A distinction between freedom of speech and hate speech is a battle that needs to be fought by us. The attitude of this French politician-bigot is vile.
So gayness is dangerous for humanity? How? If you’re going to make a mind-blowingly stupid statement like that you’d better have some pretty convincing evidence to back it up. Does he imagine gayness spreading like an epidemic until everyone in the world is gay and no-one is breeding? I guess our dating choices would be somewhat wider in the short term, but I just don’t see that happening. In any case the real danger is global overpopulation, and he can’t lay that one on us.
VANEST us a dangerous man
i can prove him i am not inferior to him .
he should be punished by the law
shame on the french legal system to let him off
What he has said is nowhere near as vile as what Iris Robinson said – she said that homosexuality was an abomination worse than paedophilia. She hasn’t faced any consequence either. And the police in Northern Ireland haven’t even questioned her. I detest the way that vicious homophobia is allowed under the banner of ‘freedom of speech’while racism is not allowed using the same banner.
I completely agree, Simon. It might be an old test, replacing ‘homosexual’ with ‘black’, but I find it works very well when judging if something’s acceptable to say. Why’s this double standard tolerated? I’d suggest it may be because of the constant pushing (especially by religious groups) that homosexuality is a ‘choice’. That’s why I get worked up when I see people say that.