Reader comments · Polish MEP and leader of Tories’ new group ‘called gays fags’ · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Polish MEP and leader of Tories’ new group ‘called gays fags’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. If this minister used the “N” word when talking about black people he would quite rightly be censured by the EU; that is exactly what should happen under these circumstances!

  2. So, the Tories claim they’re opposed to the BNP, yet are linked to them themselves now through this Polish party!!

  3. ‘Fags’, isn’t that an abreveation of ‘Faggot’, which is also a bundle of wood to be burned?

    Hey Ho! Here we go one step nearer the gas chambers for me, curtesy of the Conservative Tory party.

  4. Vincent Poffley 17 Jul 2009, 1:04pm

    “‘Fags’, isn’t that an abreveation of ‘Faggot’, which is also a bundle of wood to be burned?”

    It is indeed. Some people think that this is, in fact, where the term originates – being a reference to the faggots of wood used for burning people at the stake. This is quite an unlikely etymology though. While there are abusive terms for homosexuals that come from this phenomenon (such as the Italian finocchio, a reference to the fennel stalks people threw on the pyres to ameliorate the smell of burning flesh), burning at the stake was never used for homosexuals in English-speaking world, much less in America where the term originates. A more likely explanation is that it comes from another Middle English slang usage of faggot to mean a cantankerous old woman – cognate with baggage – derived from the fact that such people often made a living gathering and selling bundles of sticks for firewood, or possibly that they were considered a burden for their families and those around them.

  5. Could also be fag as in Tom Brown’s school days when the smaller boys were picked on by the biger ones to do their dity work in English Public Schools (just like the one Davey Cameron went too!) Or am I putting 2+2 and getting six(!) And yes, the English speaking world only burnt witches and heretics on the whole(!)

  6. Actually, Vincent, are you sure that homosexuals were not burned at the stake? While it was only officially ‘witches’ or ‘heretics’ who were burned at the stake, more often than not that actually meant marginalised people who were different in some way. Anyone who aroused suspicion or had an alternative lifestyle was labelled a witch and burned – especially unmarried women or men.

  7. Christina Engela 17 Jul 2009, 2:05pm

    “You can never find anything I said in my past against the homosexuals.”

    How about “so-called marriages for the homosexual couples”?

    How about “What should I say? They are fags.”

    That’s two things – and just in one article – I don’t care to look through more – that is enough proof.

  8. Christina is right; the spanish burnt the native americans for sodomy during the conquistadore era (but this was not general practise in england) well at that era with the inquisition, the spanish burned people for most crimes!

  9. marjangles 17 Jul 2009, 3:15pm

    Christina Engela you’re absolutely right. Politicians are idiots if they say the have never done something because someone will check. And I am so disappointed with the Tory Party, I do believe that Cameron is trying his best to abandon the old nasty party image but in their rush to try to grab more power in the EU Parliament, and as a sop to the Europhobes and the extreme right of their party, they have ended up getting into bed with some dodgy characters.

  10. Jimmy Smith 17 Jul 2009, 3:19pm

    I really don’t care what you call me. Just give me my damn rights!

  11. What is it with all the anti-tory bias on here? This isn’t about gay rights, it’s about Europe and the EU. The tories are against a federal Europe and that’s why they left the EPP and formed this new group. Unfortunately when you are trying to reach a common goal, it’s sometimes necessary to form alliances with groups that you normally wouldnt want to – and thats whats happened here. If anything, i think the tories should be applauded. They are dead against a federal Europe and have stuck to their guns and done something which could of been, and has proven to be, quite unpopular and controversial, but they’ve stuck to their principles. It would have been very easy for the tories to stay in the main EPP grouping – which leads the way in Europe. But they have principles, are putting Britain first and have negotiated this alliance cos all members are against a federal Europe. Although, the groups that Labour and the Lib Dems are in are full of commies, holocaust deniers and other loonies anyway. So let’s not pretend that it’s just the tories that are in an alliance with controversial groups.

  12. Justin Hinchcliffe 17 Jul 2009, 4:05pm

    What is your weird obsession with the new Conservative grouping in the European Parliament? Pink News used to be neutral under Tony Grew’s editorship. Now, under Ms Green, is has become biased against all things Conservative. For example, I sent in a press release on the defection of the first out gay Mayor (from Labour to the Conservatives). Was it used? You bet it wasn’t.

    Now, for once and for all, let’s get a few things straight (excuse the pun):

    1. EVERY main grouping in the EP contains people and parties who are not as tolerant as we would like them to be – and that includes the Party of European Socialists, the European People’s Party (EPP(which we used to belong to) and, even, the Liberal group.

    2. Poland and other eastern European countries are behind the times when it comes to embracing diversity. Blame decades of Communist rule for that! Attitude will change, but it will take a while.

    3. The Law and Justice Party has signed an equality pledge on gays issues – not many parties in the EP, be they left or right, can claim that. Dragging up something that may or may not have been said nine years ago is pretty desperate stuff from the BBC.

    4. The Conservative Party changed – for the better – under David Cameron’s leadership. He’s a liberal Tory. Only last week, he apologised for Section 28. Little is said that the Labour Front Bench also supported it at the time and have never apologised for it.

    As a gay, pro-European Conservative, I would have preferred to have stayed with the EPP. David Cameron, however, made the pledge to leave it during the leadership election and form a new group and won on that basis. As a democrat, I went along with it. But the idea that the three main groupings – including the EPP – are all gay-friendly is a lie and one Pink News should not persist with!

  13. Benjamin Cohen 17 Jul 2009, 4:19pm has always maintained a neutral outlook, it’s in our mission statement and editorial policy. There have been numerous interviews with Conservative politicians and features that have shown how much the Conservatives have changed.

    Unfortunately for the Conservative Party this is a real issue and we have to cover it. We’re shortly to publish an article that shows the story from the Conservative side.

    Benjamin Cohen
    Founding Publisher

  14. That’s great news, Benjamin. I just think this ‘homophobic’ polish party story has been covered far too often. There’s a new article on it every single day for crying out loud x

  15. Justin Hinchcliffe 17 Jul 2009, 4:38pm

    Why didn’t you publish the defection story then (the Evening Standard did) Tony Grew would have done…

  16. Mihangel apYrs 17 Jul 2009, 5:37pm

    “The Conservative Party changed – for the better – under David Cameron’s leadership”

    so that’s why the Tory Lords (in collaberation with the Bishops) voted down the anti-gay “hate speech” clause in the latest equality bill….

    One can judge a man by the company he keeps. These fervently anti-gay parties pay lip service to equality, but see what happens in their countries. And their backwardness is very much religious based, not communistic.

    Hopefully they will improve: in the meantime the gay community in the EU is contributing to their homophobia through subsidies, and these parties will use such subsidies to bolster their popularity.

    If they want the money then let thm adopt the socialnorms of liberal, secular Europe!!

  17. Mihangel don’t be an idiot. Voting against that bill wasnt anything to do with being anti-gay. It was to do with being pro-freedom of speech and not being too PC and letting things get out of hand. Even some gay celebs were against that bill. People like Matt Lucas were concerned it would stop them using characters like David etc. in Little Britain – which would be a real shame. You’re probs one of the ppl who object to Bruno and think thats homophobic x

  18. Bill Perdue 17 Jul 2009, 6:40pm

    Tories are bigots. GLBT Tories are self loathing.

  19. Mihangel apYrs 17 Jul 2009, 6:46pm


    I’ve actually commented on the thread concerning Bruno that I saw value in it and the way it challenges.

    It’s interesting that the tory lords and the Bishops didn’t object to the “protection against religious hatred” clause. I wonder why not.

    And I don’t like being called an idiot by someone who has picked up ONE entry. You a tory by any chance?

  20. Mihangel yeah I am a tory – what’s your point? And religious hatred is a completely different kettle of fish. Employers already get penalised for being homophobic in terms of candidate selection and in the work place. Homophobic abuse is also illegal atm. There is no need for any other laws concerning this. And Bill Perdue you’re entitled to your opinions, but I have a feeling there are just as many bigots on the Labour side. Infact the PM has never voted for gay rights. He’s had 15 chances and not voted in a single one. There is more homophobia in Labour-loving council estates and Labour-loving Muslim areas, than anywhere else in the country x

  21. Mihangel apYrs 17 Jul 2009, 10:19pm

    the reason I assked is because you obviously can’t see anything wrong in your party. And the only difference between religion and sexuality is that religion is a choice. If you read the EU Employment Regulations 2003, the religious is as protected as gays.

    And I’m not Labour, I actually CHOOSE who to vote for by considering the manifestoes. And I have illusions about aspects of the Muslim community. In fact I question anyone who claims to ahove the only answers

  22. We do have homophobes in the party. But bearing in mind a large number of our MPs are over 60, I don’t think this is a complete surprise. David Cameron is encouraging ppl from all backgrounds to join the Conservative Party and is doing a very good job in my opinion. As ppl have already said, David Cameron apologised for Section 28. I don’t actually think it was intended to be anti-gay, I think it was more an anti-state interference law to be honest. Although, be as it may, the Labour front bench supported it and they have never apologised for this and seem to conveniently forget they supported it. 30% of gay ppl compared to 18% for Labour and the Lib Dems intend to vote Tory at the next election – so we must be doing something right x

  23. @Adam

    “David Cameron apologised for Section 28. I don’t actually think it was intended to be anti-gay, I think it was more an anti-state interference law to be honest.”

    There have been some outright stupid or plain disingenuous things posted on the site over the time it’s been going but claiming ‘honestly’ that Section 28 wasn’t intended to be anti-gay triumphantly manages to be up there with the best, or rather the worst, on both counts at once. It’s a real achievement, of sorts.

  24. So what, every Friday night you hear Johnathon Ross introducing his house band as “4 Poofs and a Piano” and making borderline homophobic jokes.

    this is the face of acceptable modern Britain.

  25. lithotomist 18 Jul 2009, 8:58am

    Sorry, but any Tory apologist who claims that Section 28 ‘wasn’t meant to be anti-gay’ is either utterly self-deluded or utterly dishonest. It was quite clearly promoted as an attack on gays, an attack on fair treatment or verbal support for gays, as a way of attracting the support of anti-gay bigots. Please don’t try to rewrite history or lie to us now by claiming it was ‘about preventing state interference’ (in what exactly?) – it was a clear piece of state interference, aimed at hurting gay people.

  26. “As ppl have already said, David Cameron apologised for Section 28. I don’t actually think it was intended to be anti-gay, I think it was more an anti-state interference law to be honest”

    Unbelievable. The delusion and stupidity of gay Tories knows no bounds.

  27. Also, haven’t we been repeatability told by Tories on this site that Labour has done nothing for gay rights over the past 12 years and in fact all the new equality legislation came from Europe?

    Despite this being manifestly false to anyone who has an IQ above room temperature; why are the Tory boys in these comments saying it’s OK for the Conservatives to team up with homophobes just because they share their Euroscepticism? Surely if their claim on gay rights was true then it shows that European integration is in fact a very good and positive thing for Britain.

  28. @Justin Hinchcliffe

    You are a prospective Conservative candidate.

    Do you think it becoming of someone who wants to become an elected member of our legislature to come on here and start whining, bullying and disembling?


  29. Simon Murphy 20 Jul 2009, 12:23am

    The Tories are quite obviously lying when they say they are gay friendly. A gay person who votes Tory is doing so at the risk of his/her own rights. The Tories will sacrifice gay rights the second it becomes convenient.

    And Justin Hincliffe. Instead of whining about how the poor, brave Tory Party is being bullied it would be far better for you to be campaigning to disassociate the Tories from their blatantly homophobic chums in Poland. Although considering that the Tories probably share those views that will be difficult.

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.