Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Tories publish ‘rainbow list’ of gay candidates

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. At least thet’re showing willingness.

  2. ‘Mr Herbert’s spokesman said that the nine who did not wish to be named still wanted to be included on the list.’
    Eh? They’re not exactly out, are they? And not exactly progressive either. Almost half of the Tories’ prospective gay candidates are basically saying, ‘Yes, we are gay, but we’re too ashamed to name ourselves.’ Pretty much reinforces the stereotype of gay Tories being self-loathing.

  3. I heartily approve but I wonder if it means a viably elected Tory government will actually do anything for lgbt rigthts. If elected, I hope these candidates will be vocal and troublesome if it doesn’t.
    (I actually want a hung parliament).

  4. Agree with Charlie

  5. Daniel Pitt 8 Mar 2010, 12:19pm

    I smell another sick publicity stunt to rope in voters. Don’t forget that hypocritical David Conman & his Old Etonian buddies voted against every gay rights legislation that has ever existed, including freedom from discrimination!

  6. Kris Jones 8 Mar 2010, 12:19pm

    Like Charlie above, I’m baffled that out of 20 “out” gay candidates, only 11 want to be named. I guess they can’t be ashamed of their Tory party candidature so why aren’t the other nine prepared to be named?

  7. Lucio Buffone 8 Mar 2010, 12:43pm

    They could stand 651 gay candidates, and I still would never vote Tory. I do worry that Pink News has a slight Tory bias, with it’s news coverage.

  8. Actually they cover each party equally. I think your looking for ‘The Socialist’ Lucio.

  9. I don’t see why candidates have to be ‘outed’. If they don’t want to be one a list so what? Your horrified when gay people are sacked from a job because of their sexuality arguing be gay doesn’t affect doing the job. This is no different. If they’re gay and don’t wish it to be broadcast so bloomin what.

  10. 1. Do these candidates support marriage equality? If not then why not?

    2. Do these candidates support the exclusion of religious establishments from equality legislation?

    3. Do these candidates believe that religious extremist Iain Duncan Smith is a suitable minister to be in charge of family affairs considering his efforts to reduce the rights of gay parents.

    4. Do these candidates support ‘Call me Dave’ Cameron’s idea to massively increase state funding to faith schools (who are allowed to fire gay teachers because of their exemption from equality lawa).
    5. Do these candidates think that the alliance between the Tories and the homophobic, anti-Semitic Law and Justice Party in Poland is appropriate?

    Or are their names simply being announced as a PR stunt?

  11. 6. Do they support Labour’s encouraging mass immigration of homophobes in the belief they’ll vote Labour?

    7. Do they support the Bankrupcy of the UK?

    8. Do they support the flitting away of UK laws to Europe?

    9. Do they support benefits being given to people who are in prison?

    10. Do they support benefits being given to all those who have Never put into the country?

    11. Do they support the continuely doing nothing about teenage gangs and crime associated with it?

    12. Do they support the sending of troops to fight without proper protection?

    the list goes on.

  12. Squidgy – this story is about the Tories alleged/pretend commitment to LGBT equality – not about Labour. The specific questions I asked are merely to verify that the Tories are committed to LGBT equality. The Tory refusal to answer these questions strongly indicate they are engaging in a PR stunt.

    If we’re going to talk about the Labour Party in a discussion about the alleged Tory commitment to LGBT equality then we should also be discussing ‘Call Me Dave’s’ active opposition to EVERY piece of pro-gay legislation introduced in the past 10 years.

    I did not bring it up in my 1st post as I did not think it was relevant to the story. Obviously it is relevant then.

    6. Why should ANYONE believe a word that comes out of the snake-oil salesman ‘Dave’ Cameron’s mouth considering he has never voted in favour of any pro-gay legislation and supported Section 28 until its dying day?

    Especially seeing as he is a professional liar – having worked in PR?

    The questions you raise are not on point with regards to this story. The aslleged Tory commitment to LGBT equality is a valid story. And the Tories need to answer these questions.

    The Tories are still the party of choice for the Daily Mail reader. Those people hate us.

    The Tories are claiming that becausae they have 20 gay candidates (of whom 45% remain in the closet) that they are an inclusive party.

    I personally don’t care about the sexual orientation of my MP so long as they believe in equal rights and equal treatment for all.

    The gay Tory candidates need to show that they are committed to LGBT equality before they should be taken seriously.

  13. I do think the Tories attempts to attract LGBT support reeks of desperation.

    Their lead in the polls is eroding rapidly; and the toxic news story of Lord Ashcroft/Cashcrop – a multi-billionaire peer, who doesn’t pay much tax in Britain trying to buy the election for the Tories is seriously bad news for them.

  14. vulpus_rex 8 Mar 2010, 1:51pm

    “The gay Tory candidates need to show that they are committed to LGBT equality before they should be taken seriously.”

    So any candidate, regardless of party or calibre, can’t have a commitment to LGBT equality taken seriously unless they view it within the context of your very narrow definition of how they demonstrate that commitment.

    Which party does that – none as far as I can see, so I am curious to know who exactly you will be voting for?

    It sounds almost as if you will need to consider other wider issues when making your decision – ooh a bit like those issues identified at 11.

  15. This is the political equiavlent of “I’ve got gay friends.” It doesn’t matter how many token self-hating gays the Tories can put forward to rainbow-wash their homophobia – it remains true that the Tories are the political part of homophobia hate. Their record is clear – their current votes are clear. In the Lord and the Commons, in vote after vote we see the Tories – THESE Tories, not some historic Tories who have been banished to the past – endlessly voting against gay rights at every possible opportunity

    Pink News needs to stop reporting these token Tory gestures without including the context of the Tory party’s homophobia. it’s deceptive – act as reporters, not propaganda mouth pieces!

  16. Patrick James 8 Mar 2010, 2:10pm

    As a Labour party guy I will say that it is commendable that these LGBT Conservative parliamentary candidates are open about their sexuality.

    It does strike me as a bit weird for the Mail to say that “the Tories have 20 out gay candidates, with 11 of these happy to be named”. Doesn’t that mean they have 11 out candidates? :)

    It is good when out LGBT people stand for parliament.

    My primary concern about Nick Herbert is that his energies are about presenting the Conservative party as LGBT friendly when it most definitely is not.

    Amongst many other things the Conservative party has close links with the Polish Law and Justice party in the European Parliament. This is a deeply homophobic political party.

    As a Labour guy it would be great if the opposition were trying to be better than Labour about policies in respect of LGBT rights. I would of course love for Labour to endorse Marriage for LGBT people rather than just civil partnerships and if the opposition were in favour of this it would make it easier for LGBT people within the Labour party to argue the case for this.

    What is happening in the Conservative party is that LGBT issues are something which you say you are in favour of but act against.

    My hope is that people with an interest in LGBT issues will reject this.

  17. Vulpux Rex: “So any candidate, regardless of party or calibre, can’t have a commitment to LGBT equality taken seriously unless they view it within the context of your very narrow definition of how they demonstrate that commitment.”

    My definition is not narrow.

    If a Tory candidate is opposed to marriage equality; supportive of the religious exemption from equality legislation; in favour of increased state funding to homophobic ‘faith schools; in favour of Iain Duncan Smith to be in charge of family afairs and in favour of the alliance between the Tories and the extreme right homophobes in Poland; then I absoilutely do not believe that they are in favour of LGBT equality.

    ESPECIALLY if they are a Tory. The Tories have been so poisonously and viciously homophobic for so long, that it is simply not good enough for ‘Dave’ to say ‘Oh we’ve changed’ |(without giving ANY demonstrable example of how they’ve changed in practice).

    And why are 45% of the gay Tory candidates in the closet?

  18. I would like all parties to publish a list of all candidates regardless of sexuality who agree with full homosexual, bisexual and transgender equality.

    Its so easy for us to get caught up in the numbers of our own in parliament. Should we not be looking at what the majority of MPs think of LGBT equality and the big issues that effect us.

  19. Well Abi – the trouble with that is the the Tories, Labour and the LibDems all believe that they support LGBT equality.

    From an outside point of view I would rank the parties as follows:

    1. LibDem
    2. Labour
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    3. Tories

  20. SimonM – I’m well aware of what the story is about. What you have done is typically Labour. You only focus on the opposition and that only gay candidates for gay issues. You never focus on what failures Labour make like my (6). We have gay troops if your going to nit pick. My point is I don’t see why everyone has out and labelled. Lets face it your actually responding to the media story than a party one and from the Daily Mail.

    While as a man who happens to be gay, gay issues play a part but its not everything thats important in my life and just because there are Some out gay MP’s and some not my focus is on a whole range of things. I’m not too closed minded to believe other things are important.

    Surely the bigger point is as already stated not so much how many gay MP’s there are but how many MP’s in total that support gay rights, gay, lesbian, bi, trans, straight, pig….

  21. Patrick James 8 Mar 2010, 2:50pm

    Squidgy writes:

    6. Do they support Labour’s encouraging mass immigration of homophobes in the belief they’ll vote Labour?

    I think this is very convoluted myself. However, if the concern is that Islam represents a threat to LGBT people in the UK then this really is not justified.

    The threat LGBT rights in the UK comes from the Christian churches. Despite the impression given by the Mail and other Conservative supporting newspapers Islam isn’t on the map at all.

    I try to keep “on topic” at these PinkNews postings and keep to the business of LGBT issues.

    Unfortunately Conservative supporting posters don’t seem to do this, they start posting about other things. I wish they would stay with LGBT issues myself.

    Briefly I will comment on Squidgy’s other points.

    7. Do they support the Bankrupcy of the UK?

    I don’t see what the intention is with this comment. Is the suggestion perhaps that Labour supports the bankruptcy of the UK? It won’t be in the manifesto I don’t think :)

    I believe that the Labour party took the right actions through the economic crisis. The creation of a large deficit was the least damaging option.

    I think Labour won that economic argument some time ago.

    8. Do they support the flitting away of UK laws to Europe?

    This is a bit more interesting. The Conservative party presents itself as being opposed to the “flitting away of UK laws to Europe” but in fact it’s actions hugely reduce our power over EU legislation and as a consequence UK legislation.

    Their creation of the ECR group in the European Parliament, the group which includes the Polish Law and Justice party, has reduced their influence within the European Parliament to zero. If the Conservative party becomes the government of the UK then the UK will have close to zero influence in the European Union.

    I think that this is a great shame because the UK can be a very good influence in the European Union.

    9. Do they support benefits being given to people who are in prison?

    Maybe we shouldn’t feed those prisoners either? That’ll show them!

    10. Do they support benefits being given to all those who have Never put into the country?

    Clearly a reference to Lord Ashcroft and a very good point.

    11. Do they support the continuely doing nothing about teenage gangs and crime associated with it?

    We know very well that a great Labour victory has been the reduction of inner city crime over the last decade.

    12. Do they support the sending of troops to fight without proper protection?

    Well, nobody supports troops going to fight without proper protection. Every war that has been fought has had this problem of the treasury limiting the funding for it. This is just as true of past Conservative administrations as it is of the current Labour administration.

    The only difference this time is that the Conservative minded General Dannatt has turned this into a greater political debate. It might well be that this is a good thing overall but the problem has been raised by General Dannatt with a view to undermining the Labour government. It would have been much better if he had been honest about his political associations when he was making this points instead of pretending he was unbiased and then coming out as a Conservative supporter after the fact and going straight into a cushy number in the Conservative party.

    I am a Labour guy but I will certainly not write that the Labour government has been perfect, not by a long way.

    I would love to see a much better opposition than that given by the Conservative party.

    I do feel that it is good to look at the issues much more closely than simply relying on the Daily Mail.

  22. Abi is right. Who cares what sexuality a person’s sexuality is? And heaven knows we’ve got more than our fair share of Uncle Toms in the gay community.

  23. Now let the Tories prove once and for all just how truly supportive they are than Labour of full equality by supporting civil marriage for gay and lesbian couples. That too would prove just how much they have changed. I suspect we’ll get NOTHING as usual. Therefore, neither Labour nor Tory will get my vote. If they want it, let them earn it.

  24. I am NOT a tories and I don’t read the daily muck’s. Usually I am Lib Dem but I Cannot vote Lib Dem with the chance Labour will be in again.

    Actually I wasn’t ‘exclusively’ talking about Islam but some very right-wing Christian groups. My arguement was to opposite the question about who the Tories side with in Europe. At least thats where they are, not being invited. Labour always convienently side step all there wrong-doings to smear others.

    Labour are hypocrites – they have non-doms. There is absolutely no way a man making Ashcrofts money would have bypassed the Treasury. All this looks like Labour smearing, the Nasty party with Mandlesons name written all over it. Prisoners shouldn’t be on benefits. They get paid as it is, fed, clothed and rehabilatated. They are there to learn Not for hand outs. Again with Ashcroft you cover the real question and the avoidance of answering it.

    The question was, Do they support benefits being given to all those who have Never put into the country?

    Why should British disabled, pensioners have to fight and struggle to get what they need and foreigners can come here and get it handed to them on a plate. Why should people on high incomes be getting benefits.

    Your crime statement is b*ll*cks. More teenagers have died. Gang warfare hits many estate streets where Children are being killed just for being in the wrong postcode. Or as Labour continuely do, do you cover that up with Labour trumphs which is not only ignorant but an insult to every person that has died because of knife, gun etc crime. I believe only under Boris has knife crime in London Actually gone down with his introduction of metal detectors etc.

    You argument about the troops is seriously flawed. Why is it All the heads of the forces constantly critise Labour for their failings. Why is Labour planning to have a media black-out of the Afghan War so it doesn’t taint the election campaign. That just sends a signal that troops just don’t matter. It seems Gordy B uses the troops to his advance when it suits him.

    This country, we as gay people deserve a whole lot better than this.

    Get real – this government is a disaster. If it was just bad fine I would just vote Lib Dem but the fact now we have an Equality Minister who clearly only wants Equality for some because we can’t go upsetting the church, we i’m sorry but they have to be gotten rid of. More and more people are turning to the BNP and not for bigotted reasons just because Labour no longer listen to them and I fear that another five years no only would finish Britain but also gay rights because they will screw it up so bad the alternative just doesn’t bear thinking about.

  25. vulpus_rex 8 Mar 2010, 3:51pm

    “My definition is not narrow.”

    Yes it is – trite and blinkered with it. Otherwise legitimate concerns are obfuscated by a cloud of rhetoric that is more to do with finding a reason, any reason at all, to promote anti-Tory propaganda.

    It would just be more honest if you came out (pun intended) and stated what is I suspect your true position ” I hate the Tories and nothing will ever change that”.

    Witness the blatant dishonesty above:

    “(without giving ANY demonstrable example of how they’ve changed in practice).”

    An apology for clause 28? I don’t know, but suspect that you would happily just dismiss this as a stunt. What is the basis for such scepticism – he is a Tory and he used to work in PR.

    Trite and blinkered as I said.

    Now – answer the other question, which paragon of LGBT equality will you be voting for and then we can see if your standards are as consistently harsh?

  26. Lets face it Mandleson may be gay but he is also one of the most corrupt politicans of our time. Here’s only back because he the best at stabbing people in the back.

  27. Back in 2001 ahead of the General Election the Lib Dems published a list of over 20 out lesbian, gay or bisexual candidates. So the Tories are a decade behind and even then only doing half as well – nuff said!

  28. Vulpus Rex and Squidgy.

    This story is about the Tories alleged support for LGBT equality.

    Why are you unable to show practical and quantifiable ways in which the Tories support LGBT equality. Do they support marriage equality for examnple or want the religious faith schools to be bound by equality laws.

    Thanks to their vicious and hateful and VERY recent past of homophobic bigotry, these are issues that need to be discussed on an LGBT website.

    With his kind words and PR background ‘Call me Dave’ Cameron is making some nice noises. At the same time he is lining a catholic extremist opposed to gay rights (Iain Duncan Smith) to be in charge of families. He is also claiming that borderline fascists in Poland are not homophoboic.

    The Tory Party is STILL the party of Norman Tebbit and Anne Widdecombe and Iain Duncan Smith and Philippa Stroud and any number of other hateful bigots.

    Plus they are being funded by Lord Ashcroft / Cashcrop – an unelected, billionaire peer, who does not pay tax but who wants to decide on government polict.

    The Tories are not be trusted and your support of them is foolish and naive in the extreme

  29. “According to the Mail on Sunday, the Tories have 20 out gay candidates, with 11 of these happy to be named.”

    As others have commented, the above is a laughable attempt on the part of the Tories to try and whip up the number of their gay candidates to 20.

    They might as well have said:

    “We, the Conservative Party, are proud to announce that at the forthcoming 2010 general election 250 of our candidates will be gay – although 239 of them don’t wish for their identities to be made public”!

    What evidence or proof therefore would there be that 239 Tories WERE actually gay or lesbian!

    How pathetic.

    If anyone needed evidence of how Tories are generally FEARFUL of homosexuality, they now well and truly have it!

  30. vulpus_rex 8 Mar 2010, 5:19pm

    More windy rhetoric Murphy.

    You remind me of Brown – churn out nonsense often enough and you start to believe your own dishonest world view.

    You share his laziness too – look to the bottom of the page and you’ll see a number of relevant links to articles about Tory support for LGBT equality.

    I’d still like to know which party you’re going to vote for, if you dare.

  31. The Tories might as well use the tagline ‘Edward Heath was a closeted homosexual, so how on earth could Section 28 have been homophobic’.*

    It’s meaningless spin.

    These candidates actual opinions are what they need to be judged on – NOT their sexual orientation.

    *Edward Heath is dead, therefore conjecture about the sexual orientation of a self-stylred, never-married committed bachelor is perfectly acceptable

  32. Vulpus – you can engage in personl insults against me all you like but the following questions remain unanswered:

    1. . Do these candidates support marriage equality? If not then why not?

    2. Do these candidates support the exclusion of religious establishments from equality legislation?

    3. Do these candidates believe that religious extremist Iain Duncan Smith is a suitable minister to be in charge of family affairs considering his efforts to reduce the rights of gay parents.

    4. Do these candidates support ‘Call me Dave’ Cameron’s idea to massively increase state funding to faith schools (who are allowed to fire gay teachers because of their exemption from equality lawa).
    5. Do these candidates think that the alliance between the Tories and the homophobic, anti-Semitic Law and Justice Party in Poland is appropriate?
    6. Why should ANYONE believe a word that comes out of the snake-oil salesman ‘Dave’ Cameron’s mouth considering he has never voted in favour of any pro-gay legislation and supported Section 28 until its dying day?

  33. Pumpkin Pie 8 Mar 2010, 6:29pm

    I’d rather see a list of candidates who support full LGBT rights. Having lots of LGBT candidates is good news for LGBT people who want to join that party. Having lots of candidates, whoever they may be, who support full LGBT rights is good news for all LGBT people.

  34. vulpus_rex 8 Mar 2010, 6:53pm

    They are not insults Simon.

    More in the nature of observations about a technique you employ to smear all things Tory.

    You could equally ask all those questions of any main stream political party and get equally uncomfortable answers.

    Oh and why stop at Ted Heath – the Tories have given us the first non-Christian and first female prime minister and not a single quota or shortlist in sight!

    I still want to know who you are going to vote for.

  35. Answer Simon’s fu*king questions, Vulpus_Rex and if you can’t then shut the hell up!

  36. “the Tories have 20 out gay candidates, with 11 of these happy to be named.” – so 9 out of 20 “out” candidates don’t want to be named – is it me or have these Tory characters missed something about the idea of bing “out”?

  37. So if 9 don’t want to be named, then how does anyone know they are gay and how on earth can they be described as “out”? What is it they’re afraid or ashamed of I wonder? As far as I’m concerned, they’re still in the closet. So much for the “change” in the party. Of those 20, I bet few of them support FULL equality, including civil marriage equality. If any do, then why aren’t they vocal about it? My guess is none are, ditto for Labour.

  38. 6. Do they support Labour’s encouraging mass immigration of homophobes in the belief they’ll vote Labour?

    Good point Squidgy. Bit of an elephant in the living room really. Labour tries to have it both ways. Like Ken Livingstone celebrating Gay Pride one week and the next week laying on a civic reception for a “moderate” who once preached about the desirability of throwing homosexuals of a cliff.

  39. Lily Allen at the O2 Arena

    “The highlight came when she dedicated a song to David Cameron, pausing dramatically before adding “it’s called ‘F*** You’!” It was wickedly crude, and pulled everyone together for choruses with fingers aloft.”

    From a review in The Telegraph! 8 March 2010.

    Would have enjoyed being there to sing along to that!

  40. Vulpus Rex: “Oh and why stop at Ted Heath – the Tories have given us the first non-Christian and first female prime minister and not a single quota or shortlist in sight!”

    Well Benjamin Disraeli was a convert to christianity before he became PM. Which non-Christian PM were you talking about?

    And what did that closet case Ted Heath do to advance gay rights. The heterosexual John Major did more than Heath did.

    And Margaret Thatcher was no friend to women in politics. In fact women in politics did far better under the male Tony Blair.

    Just goes to show how irrelevant the fact that 20 Tory candiates are gay (despite a closet case rate of 45%)

    They should not be judged on their sexuality but on their policies.

    And none of the 20 has murmered any note of dissent about the massive distance between ‘Call me Dave’s’ words and actions.

    By the way David Cameron is refusing to expel the billionaire, tax-avoiding, non-dom Lord Ashcroft from the Tories.

    Why is that I wonder?

  41. @ Eddy

    Should Lily Allen not of followed that on by singing common people by Pulp ;)

  42. Gordon Brown has never voted FOR gay rights. He has abstained every time up between 1997 and 2007 on 16 different votes. At least David Cameron voted FOR Civil Partnerships. Brown abstained. Brown has never adequately explained why he chose not to vote for a single one of Tony Blair’s gay rights moves. I know who I’d prefer to have as PM.

    http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/mp.php?mpid=1997&dmp=826

    http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/mp.php?mpn=David_Cameron&mpc=Witney&house=commons&dmp=826

  43. How about LABOUR’s Lord Paul giving up his non-dom status. Labour and their supporters are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites.

  44. I would vote for whoever will get the following out of the joke House of Lords 1) 25 out of 26 bishops 2) All the hereditary aristocrats 3) the creepy hypocrite Waddington and Tebbit, and that woman who took over from Baroness Young as chief homophobe.

  45. Oh, and how about a retirement age of at max. 70 years of age. That should get rid of the creeps.

  46. David, at #42, you have lied. You have stated that the PM “abstained every time up between 1997 and 2007 on 16 different votes” regarding homosexuality. The very table you have given as your reference states clearly that the PM was not present at the vote. The PM, of all people, is OFTEN not able to present at votes because of other business and on such occasions he or she considers whether the vote will pass through without his being present by virtue of the number of other supporters.

    Don’t misrepresent.

    And try to interpret tables correctly.

    Are you yet another vicious lying Tory ready to twist facts bald-facedly?

    Did everyone see Cameron on TV last night spitting out an answer sometime yesterday to the BBC’s Nick Robinson? If not, take a look at the clip below. Here is a vile vicious spitting Tory if ever there has been one! If this one gets into power NOTHING will stop it from having its way. It looks human, but it is vicious. I hope as many people as possible see it. It tells betrays who Cameron really is.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/

  47. The fact Gordy B always finds other things to do during votes on gay right is yet another Labour excuse.

    Labour need to end. We need some health and stability injected into the country, that is why I am breaking my Lib Dem vote just to get this vile, two-faced, double-standards, creep of a party out.

    Dave Cameron is getting my vote and plenty of others too.

  48. 11 out of the 20 candidates were happy to be named on this list. Bully for them. Instead of degrading the other nine, has anyone considered that maybe they just don’t consider their sexuality to be relevant to their chosen employment? Isn’t that a right that we’ve all fought so hard for? Great for those who are happy to be the poster boys, you deserve praise. For those who just want to get on with the job: Good on you too. Enjoy the freedoms that we have ALL marched for in the past. Get on with the job of running the country and leaving your private life to be just that. Private.

  49. OK Squidgy you go and squidge/squander your vote on the party that yesterday told YOU that they have a considerable number of gay candidates who are too frightened to let it be known they are gay!

    Don’t ask yourself WHY they are too frightened to proudly state they are gay, Squidge, but you just go and happily squander your vote on their pathetic spinelessness.

    Maybe you admire pathetic spinelessness. Maybe you’re attracted to it.

  50. That’s a cosy little excuse you’ve whipped up there, Jon, for the spineless gay wonders of the Tory party. Your argument is totally flawed however. Apart from those pathetic closet cases every other member will be making his or her sexuality absolutely plain. All the heterosexuals will be parading their wives and children, or their heterosexual partners, before the electorate and the cameras, in effect stating to the world what their sexuality is. Meanwhile it appears to be the case that their will be a small group of the terrified mysterious who when asked will squawk “I’m not telling! I’m not telling! It’s my business! Keep away! I don’t want anyone to know!” Why? Because they want to get on with the work? Come off it! The reason is because they aren’t proud enough or brave enough to admit they are gay in front of all their peers! Why? Because they’re TORIES!

  51. vulpus_rex : “You could equally ask all those questions of any main stream political party and get equally uncomfortable answers.”

    I tell you what Simon, Vulpus won’t ask you, but I will.
    Please answer your own questions, but targeted at the current ineffectual Labour government. What exactly have these people done for us?

    All you do is immediately attack the Tories at every opportunity, but it’s not like “Call me a prat” Gordon has been so productive in *any* quarter, let alone the gay issue.

    The same party that has bottled out of gay marriage and continues to suck up to the church and muslims with faith schools.

    The fact that faith schools can opt out of mentioning any gay relationships is tantamount to Section 28, the bill you and your lot continue to moan on about 20 years later. The Labour party is probably just as guilty for ignoring LGBT rights as the Tories, if not more so.

  52. :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

    RobN wrote: “The same party that has bottled out of gay marriage . . .”

    :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

    It’s hysterical! Mr. All-Over-The-Place-RobN is now, we see above, a vehement supporter of our human right to the holy Tory institution of marriage!

    It’s hilarious! RobN’ll stick his ars* in any corner just so long as he can launch an attack.

    :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

  53. Whats hilarious is when the Tories don’t vote for gay issues they’re scum but when Labour do exactly the same thing its very convieniently ‘oh their too busy’. Yet in real life it means the same, both ARE NOT SUPPORTING equal gay rights.

    To make excuses is just sad, oh no, actually I’m guilty of it myself. When I made excuses for an ex partners violence I made excuses. This is exactly the same. The difference being I learnt. Labour and their supporters are so blind. Ya’d think with two faces they wouldn’t be but hey-ho. There heads just cant grasp how closed minded they are.

    At least I can be open minded and see maybe things Could be better. I can see we so desperately need a change of power. It’s my choice who I vote for. It won’t be the last election. If you don’t like it sue me. Oh, forgot ya can’t. Maybe another wish list for Labour, don’t let anyone vote unless its for Labour. Why not, they tell us to do everything else.

  54. Why does everyone have to come ‘out’ to do a job? Why does some feel everyone has to be defined with a label.

    So if they’re gay but don’t go round screaming it, does that stop them doing their job? How small minded. Little wonder the countries in a mess with that attitude. Thought we fought to get rid of being judged on being gay and the ability to do a job? This story is no different.

    As the ad says ‘Some people are gay, Get Over It.’

    It seems some gay people should understand it too.

  55. RobN – An equal age of consent, the repeal of Section 28, Civil Partnerships, laws against discrimination – all this has happened on Labour’s watch. A lot of it is not perfect, but this is a revolution for lesbian and gay people inconceivable under the Tories. I am no fan of the current government, but calling it ‘as bad if not worse’ than the Tories in this area is absurd.

  56. Riondo – Labour have brought in Equality education that isn’t actually equality as it allows faith schools to teach homophobia. That’s worse than section 28!

    Labour has encouraged mass immigration 3million, of which a lot are homophobic, in the believe it will increase the Labour vote.

    Labour won’t stand up to the churches and allow gay people to marry. Even some religions have been asked to perform CP which now looks doubtful it’ll happen.

  57. Squidgey,

    Labour has brought in legislation that is “worse than Section 28!” ?

    Methinks, you need to up your daily dose of anti-hallucinagenics! Worse than Section 28? You’re talking childish nonsense.

    Labour has encouraged mass immigration in order to increase the Labour vote?

    What an absurd claim!

    Labour won’t allow you to get married to another gay person?

    Do you really think the establishment of this country will?

    And have you forgotten that only because of Labour you can now engage in a Civil Partnership? It is not identical to heterosexual marriage, but let me tell you that having gone through the procedure at our local registry office it is treated and conducted in exactly the same way!

  58. There’s none so blind as those that don’t want to see the facts – in this case Labour and their very ‘shuttered”absent-minded’ supporters.

    This is the reason we need a change and Why I believe the Tories with win. We need to get rif of the ignorant attitude and start building a better future.

  59. Let’s hope it’s Good Riddance Gordy B, Labour and all that sail in her!

  60. Notice how little Squidge completely ignores Pete T’s valid points and simply prattles again like a common fish-wife.

  61. Gordon Brown was Chancellor and not PM at the time of his abstentions. I personally, as a gay man, would have expected him to bother to walk the ten minutes from 11 Downing Street to the Commons to vote for such important legislation as the reduction in the age of consent, repeal of Section 28 or Civil Partnerships. He bothered to vote against fox hunting and for the Iraq War during this period. This has nothing to do with him being busy or with House pairings. Gordon Brown actively chose the only real option open to a Labour MP who didn’t support Blair and Mandelson’s gay rights changes. He abstained. If you check out virtually every other member of the current cabinet you will find that they all found the time to turn up and vote.

  62. PeteT: “Worse than Section 28? You’re talking childish nonsense.”
    Allowing faith schools to entirely bypass education involving homosexuality is IDENTICAL in nature to section 28’s banning “promotion of homosexuality”.

    “Labour has encouraged mass immigration in order to increase the Labour vote? What an absurd claim!”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/7198329/Labours-secret-plan-to-lure-migrants.html
    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0d9_1266963445

    “And have you forgotten that only because of Labour you can now engage in a Civil Partnership?”
    That is not a marriage, and Labour bottle out of full marriage in fear of repercussions by religious groups.

    Notice I manage to answer the questions whilst Eddy continues to just insult everyone, but fails to contribute a single sentence toward the actual argument. All mouth and no dick.

  63. :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

    RobN, you can name-call me and others all you like, but you remain utterly laughable, and, currently, for the following reasons.

    1. Section 28 was a blanket ban right across the educational spectrum. The amendment concerns the manner of teaching certain subjects in faith schools. A grown adult ought to be able to perceive the massive difference between the two.

    2. I note that your only mainstream source for backing up the ridiculous assertion that Labour has agreed with free-flow of EU citizens purely in order to increase the number of Labour voters is that despicable paper, The Torygraph.

    3. And with regard to your final point, one can only repeat that it is extraordinary witnessing you, one who constantly berates gay progress on these pages, belittling Civil Partnerships and bemoaning the fact that you can’t yet have exactly the same ceremony as heterosexuals.

    :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

  64. Can someone of the Tory spologists on here list the practical steps the Tories will take to advance gay rights in this country.

    It is easy to list Labour’s achievements. They have been in power for 13 years so they are easily quantifiable.

    It is also easy to see where Labour have failed.

    1. Gay couples were granted CP’s under Labour but are denied access to the contract of civil marriage.

    What will the Tories do to address this injustice.

    2. Labour allows faith schools exemption from equality laws.
    What will the Tories do to address this injustice?

    Well ‘Call Me Dave’ will not address this.

    He intends to go even further. He intends to massively increase funding to faith schools.

    That is far more sinister than anything Labour will do.

    3. Under Labour gay couples are allowed to adopt on the same basis as straight couples.

    Under the Tories David Cameron intends to install homophobic, catholic bigot as minister in charge of families. IDS is already campaigning to reduce the rights of non-biological gay parents.

    4.David Cameron says that he would never form an alliance with a party whose views he finds ‘unacceptable’

    Does this mean he thinks referring to gay people as ‘faggots’ and ‘paedophiles’ is acceptable.
    That is what his borderline fascist Polish allies think of us.

  65. There is Nothing positive about Labour. It’s So out of touch. They’ve done nothing but screw us all over again and again. Bring on the Election and lets hope the country’s got the sense to eject these to the litter bin like the rotten, smelly fruit they are. There nothing but vile, nasty bitter ol lairs/queens (blimey it seems to rub of on their supporters) and they have no place with good decent folk.

    Really we’re all having to make do with a crappy lot with the worst of the sour lot but Labour (and it’s bitter supporters) are like the Old Churches, Well past their sell by date. I just wish we could get some real decent electable parties in.

    Labour have to go, whatever happens or the alternative isn’t worth thinking about. If they stay we will loose out in the end.

  66. Eddy, while I appreciate your points and candor – I don’t appreciate you belittling my opinion in that way.
    I am actually very cynical of politicians in general, but I don’t believe that you can judge them because they make the choice to keep their private lives private. How would you like it if your employer decided to publish information about your personal life, simply to make themselves look better?
    I run my own company, I happen to be gay. I don’t need to shout it from the rooftops for all to hear. Anyone who is important to me already knows. Anyone who doesn’t know are simply not privvy to my private life, and in this matter, I expect that MY RIGHT to my own privacy should be granted.
    The problem that I can see happening in recent days is that, while gay rights are still not entirely equal, in most respects we’re almost there. What we all have to be careful of now is to learn when to stop fighting and simply enjoy the freedoms we’ve been granted. Otherwise, the gay community will be seen as having a “chip on our shoulder”.
    Remember the story of Animal Farm, where those who fought for what they thought was just eventually became the things they fought against. Perhaps now is the time to fight for everyone’s individual rights, not just that of one group.

  67. what an amazingly repetitive thread.

  68. It’s so tiresome.

    This is an article about the Tories.

    Speciifically the Tories and their alleged commitment to gay rights.

    When asked to address how the Tories will advance these the silence from the Tory supporters is deafening.

    Squidgy and Vulpus and Rob et al know FULL well that the Tories remain the party of choice for vile homnophobic bigots like Philippa Stroud; Iain Duncan Smith and your average ‘Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells’ Daily Mail reader.

    Their point blank refusal to even acknowledghe how revoltingly homophobic the Tories remain should serve as a warning to the rest of us.

    If gay supporters of the Tories are so unconvinced of the Tory commitment to equality, then LGBT rignts are going to be comprehensively dismantled under the Tories.

    The pathetic silence of the LGBTory group should serve as another warning.

  69. David Cameron said to Attitude magazine last month that the Tories would enter an alliance with any group whose views he found ‘unacceptable’.

    Michal Kaminski of the Polish Law and Justice Party (the Tory allies in Europe) was filmed in 2000 calling gay people “faggots”, while Law and Justice MP Stanislaw Pieta recently said that most paedophiles are gay – he said that gay people make up 1% of the population are gay but that 43% of paedophiles are gay.

    David Cameron finds these views ACCEPTABLE.

    Watch out LGBT people.

    The Nasty Tory Party are coming after your rights.

  70. I’ve stated my reasons for voting Tory. Others have Made up their own conclusions why I am.

    A Conservative lead hung parliament would be the best thing of all. Maybe then we can get back the real politics.

    Like I said before, I’m voting Tory, not because I support them but just to get this vile lot out. I will Not be alone in this action. If you don’t like it… sue me! Oh you can’t yet, we’re not in the communist country you seem to want.

  71. So you’re voting for a party whose leader thinks it ‘acceptable’ to regard gay people as ‘faggots’ and ‘paedophiles’?

    Howe bizarre. Well it is a democracy I suppose.

  72. “Jon”, you imply that I have previously replied to a comment of yours, but if you examine the thread closely you will see that I have not.

    However, I see that your view and mine differ.

    You ask how I would like it if my employer decided to publish information about my personal life, simply to make themselves look better? Information about my personal life is a world way about the simple fact that I don’t go with women I go with men. This is a fundamental human categorization. It does not constitute the dangerous, damning, or embarrassing “personal information” to which you refer – unless, to you, being known as being a man who has sex with men is seen as “dangerous, damning, or embarrassing”, in which case you have a problem with accepting your simple sexuality.

    You say you run your own company. Clearly, you feel you will lose business if people get wind of the fact that your queer.

    Jon, you need to be brave and you need to start learning to TRUST people! Yes, there will always be the secret homophobes out there, but the fact is if in today’s climate you are out and above-board and transparent, then most people will not turn against you because you are gay. Instead, you will find that if the service you provide is competitive and of good quality people will choose you over others.

    Do it! Make the jump! You’ll be surprised!

    I lost a friend recently. He’d spent all his working life keeping his sexuality a secret! He dies and I meet all his work colleagues, going back years. They tell me they all knew and really wished he’d been open because then they could have shared so much, all life’s little worries and concerns.

    Don’t shut them out, Jon. Let them in.

  73. Patrick James 10 Mar 2010, 3:25pm

    Eddy writes:

    2. I note that your only mainstream source for backing up the ridiculous assertion that Labour has agreed with free-flow of EU citizens purely in order to increase the number of Labour voters is that despicable paper, The Torygraph.

    Eddy is absolutely right, this story by the Telegraph was completely debunked long ago.

  74. Simon M – If you prove to me those words were said by David Cameron then I will think again.

  75. Patrick James 10 Mar 2010, 3:39pm

    SimonM has asked five very good questions:

    1. Do these candidates support marriage equality? If not then why not?

    2. Do these candidates support the exclusion of religious establishments from equality legislation?

    3. Do these candidates believe that religious extremist Iain Duncan Smith is a suitable minister to be in charge of family affairs considering his efforts to reduce the rights of gay parents.

    4. Do these candidates support ‘Call me Dave’ Cameron’s idea to massively increase state funding to faith schools (who are allowed to fire gay teachers because of their exemption from equality lawa).

    5. Do these candidates think that the alliance between the Tories and the homophobic, anti-Semitic Law and Justice Party in Poland is appropriate?

    I think Conservative supporters in the forum should address them.

    I also think that anyone voting Conservative should answer them even if they claim it is tactical, because they are still voting Conservative.

    It would be good if Lib Dem supporters would address them because even though the Lib Dems have very good policies on LGBT issues there is a very real possibility that the Lib Dems will be supporting a Conservative administration in the event of a hung parliament.

    I don’t think UKIP supporters need to answer them because to be honest I don’t really care about their responses :)

  76. Patrick James – I have no idea what the answers the candidates would give to those questions but you seem to be asking questions about things Labour are doing, so being that it’s Labour in government and its their policies it’s a bit unfair to ask what the others would do, when they are Labour policies, why should the others do anything. Labour are making the bad decisions yet, still the Tories are getting the blame. But I will answer for you my View.

    1). Yes I support marriage equally BUT Both Labour and the Tories don’t seem to. Its unfair for a Labour supporters to ask when their OWN party Don’t.

    2). No I don’t support religious exclusions from equality legislation. Again Labour do not. This is Their making not the Tories. I haven’t heard from the Tories on this so a bit unfair.

    3). To be honest it’s David Cameron in charge so all this bleating about has been IDS is boring. However on a different issue regarding family. Why should my parents who have been married 45 years this year, worked all their lives be worst of with their pensions. If they were to split and divorce they would get more. Is that fair? That’s Labour for you.

    4). Personally I would scrap all state schools and if religion has to be taught then all children get the same amount of time studying all the major religions. No I wouldn’t support homophobia taught in schools. However again Section 28 said homosexuality couldn’t be taught. NOW under Labour we have schools being given the green light to teach homophobic views. This again is a Labour issue NOT a Tory one.

    5). No, who the Tories have choosen to side with is not appropiate. However some on here are very two faced over this issue. For Cameron the alliances are only to bolster numbers not opinions. Comments are from years ago from the other party and yes I know you say the Tories will never change . The two-faced bit comes from – example – When a christian registar says she’ll take her case to the European Courts most seem to remind everyone that she’ll have little chance of success because of the European Human Rights so it’ll be thrown out (we hope). So the argument is flawed. If Europe sticks up for gay people what is suddenly going to stop that by who the Tories chose to side with. Very little.

    For all the Labour bleatings I constantly read from Labour supporters that Europe will override any country on Equality laws. ‘It’s only a matter of time.’ So with that in mind that is why I feel i can vote Tory. I don’t believe our rights will suddenly disappear. My overwhelming concern is that the most important thing is the fact this country is in one hell of a mess. If it doesn’t get sorted we are going to suffer the consequences. I keep saying this is NOT going to be the last election. If I don’t like them in five years time I will vote them out. Most likely I will go back to voting Lib Dem.

    But for now I am desperate to just get rid of this bad rotten bunch who aren’t in it to serve the country but only to serve themselves with healthy pensions and paypackets why the rest of the country pays suffers paying for their priviledge.

    It is my right to think about and choose who to vote for. Again I usually vote Lib Dem but I really can’t afford to waste my vote in the change it will keep Labour in. In 1997 most people voted Labour, it wasn’t about politics it was about getting the Tories out. Well that’s how myself and Many, many other feel now.

  77. Correction – on 4). I meant faith schools not state schools should scrapped.

    Thank you.

  78. The problem voting for either Labour or Tory is that we do so when we get no guarantees that there will be more equality coming our way. The only way to achieve marriage equality sooner rather than later is to stop voting for either party. Support parties that do, even though they may not win, but it sends a clear message to mealy-mouthed politician such as Brown and Cameron, among others that our votes can’t be taken for granted. Action speaks louder than words. Unless they support FULL equality, don’t keep giving them power. Both are as bad as each other. They claim they’re all for fiscal conservancy yet once they’re elected, they give tax breaks for the rich and other loopholes and let the middle class and working poor the shaft. Conservative governments all over the western world are notorious for borrowing and running up huge debt. Just look at America under arch conservative Bush who spent more than any president in history and run the economy into a world recession with record unemployment. Since 1950-2008, the worst recessions and unemployment occurred under republican (conservative) administrations. Expect the same in our own country. Not that I’m enamored of Labour either, nor will I vote for them or the other party, since neither believe in our full equality. Why isn’t anyone asking Cameron right NOW what he’s going to do about the marriage issue if his views on equality are to be believed. Doesn’t it make sense to be asking this question of him before the election rather than vote just because the other alternative for some is worse? They all say things to get elected, the trouble is, we believe them.

  79. SimonM: “So you’re voting for a party whose leader thinks it ‘acceptable’ to regard gay people as ‘faggots’ and ‘paedophiles’?”

    Citation Needed.
    (I won’t hold my breath.)

  80. Robert – what you say is fine I guess if it were a local Election but this isn’t. I think it is foolish to base a vote just on gay issues as there are a lot more issues also that have to be taken into account. Equal marriage would be nice and it will come. But it’s not the most important issue I need to think about. There are a lot more issues that are more important and a lot of those being gay doesn’t come into it.

  81. Eddy, thanks for your advice on how to run my highly successful florists, that I run with my partner of 14 years. I certainly don’t hide my sexuality. I just don’t walk around with a chip on my shoulder about it, getting all huffy if someone assumes anything about me. Nor do I feel the need when a customer walks in to say:
    “Hi, welcome, I’m Gay, I have sex with men, it’s a fundamental right, not a lifestyle choice.”
    I just say: “Hi, how can I help?” (note the complete lack of reference to my sexuality. Apparently, it’s possible to have gay people who don’t make a march out of an assumption.)
    I don’t have any issue with my sexuality, nor do I need to hide it. It simply has no relevance at all to my professional life. Some people assume I’m gay, some assume I’m straight, some ask, some don’t. If they ask, I tell them. If they don’t ask, I have no need to tell them do I?

    By the way, this is the response I was talking about:

    “That’s a cosy little excuse you’ve whipped up there, Jon, for the spineless gay wonders of the Tory party. Your argument is totally flawed however. Apart from those pathetic closet cases every other member will be making his or her sexuality absolutely plain. All the heterosexuals will be parading their wives and children, or their heterosexual partners, before the electorate and the cameras, in effect stating to the world what their sexuality is. Meanwhile it appears to be the case that their will be a small group of the terrified mysterious who when asked will squawk “I’m not telling! I’m not telling! It’s my business! Keep away! I don’t want anyone to know!” Why? Because they want to get on with the work? Come off it! The reason is because they aren’t proud enough or brave enough to admit they are gay in front of all their peers! Why? Because they’re TORIES!

    Report this comment to us

    Comment by Eddy — March 9, 2010 @ 13:42

    Seems fairly directed at me, I certainly didn’t see anyone else called Jon within the thread, between my initial comment and yours. I apologise though if this was directed at someone else.

  82. Well said Jon. I’m fed up with this ‘if your gay you got to scream it from every rafters’ attitude. You can be out and proud WithOUT feeling the need to scream it.

    It’s not worth getting into debate with Some of the above because they seem to take it Very badly when they see other people with opinions that differ from there own. They get childish and start to insult. It’s Very sad.

  83. Sister Mary clarence 11 Mar 2010, 10:29am

    Jon and Squidgy both excellently articulated postings, however they will do nothing to convince the vocal minority that you are not bad homosexuals for failing to support Labour as the country drowns.

  84. Patrick James 11 Mar 2010, 6:10pm

    Squidgy has responded to the questions put by SimonM originally and quoted by me.

    1). Yes I support marriage equally BUT Both Labour and the Tories don’t seem to. Its unfair for a Labour supporters to ask when their OWN party Don’t.

    Well the questions were put by SimonM. I am a Labour guy and I am happy to address this. The inequality over marriage is absolutely wrong, I would not claim that Labour has a perfect record and LGBT Labour types like me are working very hard for this to be correctd.

    2). No I don’t support religious exclusions from equality legislation. Again Labour do not. This is Their making not the Tories. I haven’t heard from the Tories on this so a bit unfair.

    When this very issue was debated in the House of Lords every Tory peer bar one voted to exclude religious organisations from equality legislation.

    Although you won’t hear David Cameron saying that the Conservatives do not support equality legislation the party actively opposes this in practice.

    3). To be honest it’s David Cameron in charge so all this bleating about has been IDS is boring. However on a different issue regarding family. Why should my parents who have been married 45 years this year, worked all their lives be worst of with their pensions. If they were to split and divorce they would get more. Is that fair? That’s Labour for you.

    First of all Ian Duncan Smith is a representative of by far the largest segment of the Conservative party. David Cameron is himself deeply conservative according to his old friend Ed Vaizey.

    It is very rare for people to be better off if they split up and the figure, if so, is inconsequential.

    The issue here is that the tax system is to be used to favour morality and lifestyle issues rather than economic issues. This is something which must be stopped imho.

    4). Personally I would scrap all faith schools and if religion has to be taught then all children get the same amount of time studying all the major religions. No I wouldn’t support homophobia taught in schools. However again Section 28 said homosexuality couldn’t be taught. NOW under Labour we have schools being given the green light to teach homophobic views. This again is a Labour issue NOT a Tory one.

    I have amended your answer replacing “state” with “faith” as you wished in a following posting.

    I would love to see the faith schools abolished myself but the Conservatives are planning the biggest increase in faith schools since the 19th Century.

    There is a lot of confusion over this amendment to the Children, Schools and Families Bill.

    Prior to this bill faith schools could do whatever they like with respect to sex and relationship education, the bill has made it that they must include information about homosexual relationships. So the bill represents an advance on what went before. Labour’s original bill was that the faith schools would have the same regulation as applied to the state schools. However that bill was doomed in the House of Lords because of Conservative opposition. So, the bill was amended such that it could be passed through parliament. As a Labour guy I abhor the amendment to the bill, but the Conservative party and their friends in the Anglican and Catholic churches were the real obstacle to the original and very good bill going through parliament.

    5). No, who the Tories have choosen to side with is not appropiate. However some on here are very two faced over this issue. For Cameron the alliances are only to bolster numbers not opinions. Comments are from years ago from the other party and yes I know you say the Tories will never change . The two-faced bit comes from – example – When a christian registar says she’ll take her case to the European Courts most seem to remind everyone that she’ll have little chance of success because of the European Human Rights so it’ll be thrown out (we hope). So the argument is flawed. If Europe sticks up for gay people what is suddenly going to stop that by who the Tories chose to side with. Very little.

    Now to this large subject of the Conservative party’s relationship with the Polish Law and Justice Party.

    The advancement of the far right Law and Justice party is I believe Conservative party’s single most significant homophobic act. The immediate victims are be LGBT people in Poland. In addition to LGBT Poles the Conservative Party’s actions form a clear statement to other extreme right wing parties that they will deal with them.

    There is nothing historic about the homophia of the Law and Justice party. It is worth reading this piece in Lib Dem Voice about activities in January of this year.

    The Consevative’s ECR grouping was created to facilitate the Law and Justice party. The infamous homophobic leader of the Law and Justice party Mihal Kaminski was given the position of chair of the ECR bye the British Conservative party. As a consequence Michal Kaminski was made a member of the prestigious Conference of Presidents.

    The alliance between the British Conservative party and the Polish Law and Justice party goes far deeper than merely sharing their tiny parliamentary group. This is a real alliance where one party advances the cause of another within the parliament as if they were the same party.

    For all the Labour bleatings I constantly read from Labour supporters that Europe will override any country on Equality laws. ‘It’s only a matter of time.’

    But it takes a long time. In the eighties all progressive legislation on LGBT issues was passed under threat of action by the European Court of Human Rights, however the procedure of taking a case to the ECHR requires individuals who will give up all their time for years to process this. As a consequence breaches of Human Rights can take years to resolve. In the eighties issues such as an equal age of consent came many years after they had become the norm in the rest of Europe and in the US.

    So with that in mind that is why I feel i can vote Tory. I don’t believe our rights will suddenly disappear. My overwhelming concern is that the most important thing is the fact this country is in one hell of a mess. If it doesn’t get sorted we are going to suffer the consequences. I keep saying this is NOT going to be the last election. If I don’t like them in five years time I will vote them out. Most likely I will go back to voting Lib Dem.

    But for now I am desperate to just get rid of this bad rotten bunch who aren’t in it to serve the country but only to serve themselves with healthy pensions and paypackets why the rest of the country pays suffers paying for their priviledge.

    It is my right to think about and choose who to vote for. Again I usually vote Lib Dem but I really can’t afford to waste my vote in the change it will keep Labour in. In 1997 most people voted Labour, it wasn’t about politics it was about getting the Tories out. Well that’s how myself and Many, many other feel now.

    The UK is certainly not in a mess as you state, this is ridiculous. The UK is a very much better society now than it was in 1997 when Labour came to power. Unemployment is very low. Crime is greatly reduced after the Tory years. Education has improved enormously in the poorest parts of the UK. The list of social and economic improvements is very great indeed.

    The Tories will bring a great rise in the number of faith schools in the UK.

    They will reduce UK influence in the EU to zero.

    They will continue to fuel the rise of extreme right wing parties in the EU.

    They will damage the economic recovery from the recession with their ideological commitment to cutting public services.

    You say that it is your right to vote for who you wish and of course that is true.

    But is it your right to delude yourself about the Conservative’s activities in Poland? This act alone is utterly shameful.

    Is it your right to perpetrate your own ignorance by only reading Conservative party supporting news items?

    I think that people should vote and use that vote wisely. They should find out about the issues themselves and make intelligent decisions.

    People do not have a right to inflict their stupidity on others.

  85. Jon, sorry I missed that posting of mine in response to yours. Your subsequent response was a fair distant down from mine and contained no number or time reference to mine and so I could not reference it.

    Anyway, I note you now say, in Comment #81:

    “If they ask, I tell them. If they don’t ask, I have no need to tell them do I?”

    Why are you obfuscating?

    I suggest it is irrational fear and distrust of others which motivates the odd logic and sleight-of-hand that you appear to be using.

    So, let’s go into your florist’s.

    Someone walks in and asks you if you’re gay. You have said that you answer proudly that you are. Good for you, Jon!

    Then you say if someone walks in and does not ask you if you are gay then you do not tell them, and you appear to demanding your right to hold this position. Well, there’s no need to demand the right, Jon. Nobody here has suggested, or is suggesting, that when someone comes into your shop and does NOT ask you if you are gay that you should then immediately turn round and start telling them, “I’m gay, I’m gay, you know!

    However, when a person enters your shop (and does not ask you if you are gay) but then proceeds to engage with you in everyday small-talk about all sorts of matters, just passing the time of day, it would appear from what you have said that you withhold all reference to the fact that you are gay.

    I will make this clearer. When your customer, Pete, says, “Yeah, I was over in Spain with my wife on holiday just two weeks ago”, are you proud enough and trusting enough a gay man to then freely reply, perhaps, “Really? Spain? My boyfriend and I are off there next Saturday! Where abouts were you?”

    Or do you vet all normal responses so that they never include any such reference to your sexuality?

    If you do, that’s exactly the same as being a deliberate closet-case.

    Share who you are in an easy natural and relaxed manner with all with whom you come in contact.

  86. vulpus_rex 12 Mar 2010, 1:23pm

    “I’m voting Tory, not because I support them but just to get this vile lot out”

    That should really close the debate.

    Mr Murphy et al may have some fair but unapalatable questions about Tory attitude to LGBT equality and makes a lot of noise (endless and repeated) about the lack of answers.

    I will freely concede that the above won’t be at the top of their policy agenda – I simply don’t care, in the wider context of what is good for society in the UK it is just not that important at the moment.

    What is important though is the following – by any objective measure or standard, the Labour party have been an absolute disaster for the UK. They have failed repeatedly at every level.

    They are corrupt, incompetent, and lead by a person of such breath taking dishonesty that I cannot believe that I should put my individual rights above what is good for the country.

    The alternative to a conservative governemnt is five more years of Gordon Brown – do you really want that abhorrent monster in charge?

  87. Gordon Brown “an abhorrent monster”.

    Jesus! vulpus-rex, whoever you are, you need to get on medication and/or treatment.

    “an abhorrent monster”!

    Talk about a psychosis!

  88. Paul: “Jesus! vulpus-rex, whoever you are, you need to get on medication and/or treatment. “an abhorrent monster”! Talk about a psychosis!”

    Ah right, but this sort of completely fabricated, slanderous and vicious comment is acceptable, is it Paul?

    “So you’re voting for a party whose leader thinks it ‘acceptable’ to regard gay people as ‘faggots’ and ‘paedophiles’?”

    The only reason the Labour Party have not been officially declared professionally incompetent and utterly beneath contempt is because it might contravene the Official Secrets Act.

    Hmm: My Captcha is “Parliamentary lobotomy” – How very apt.

  89. RobN, it is hardly “completely fabricated, slanderous and vicious” of Paul to suggest that psychosis could explains Vulpus’s believing that Britain’s Prime Minister is “an abhorrent monster”.

    But, of course, as we all well know you, RobN, support the Farrage-Farrago – the career politician who gets himself elected to a body he then says he doesn’t believe in just so that he can call for its deconstruction and demolition!

    No wonder you’re attracted to him, RobN.

    He’s a full-time saboteur.

  90. Eddy: Sometimes the only way to demolish something is to get into it and smash it from the inside out. The sooner the EU collapses under the weight of it’s own smug self-importance, the better.

    At least he says what he thinks instead of brown-nosing all those unelected Euro-spongers.

  91. I personally place more faith in the wide consensus of European states than in the insular separatist mentality of UK islanders.

  92. Eddy: “I personally place more faith in the wide consensus of European states than in the insular separatist mentality of UK islanders.”

    Well you know the answer to that one then. Do us all a favour and f_ck off and live in Europe. Leave us ‘insular separatists’ to paddle our own canoes.

  93. RobN, whether you and Farrage-the-Farrago like it or not, Britain IS a member of the European Community. Of the two of us, it’s YOU who is the odd one out. It’s you who doesn’t like our membership of the EU. Therefore it is you who needs to leave Europe.

    Where will you go, RobN? The South Seas? Some nice little island where you can stomp around like Lord Muck? “Now, listen all your brown-skins, I’m pure English, geddit! Pure English, 400 years of it, and I’m taking over here, because there’s no room for me and some of my narrow-minded fellow-islanders back on Blighty!”

    I think they’ll tell YOU to do THEM a favour, RobN, and to kindly paddle your canoe somewhere else.

  94. Too right I don’t like the membership! *I* wasn’t f_cking asked!! Along with every other British citizen. This backhanded, slimebag government offered a referendum as part of their election manifesto, and then went ahead anyway, and snuck it in via the Lisbon treaty. Well we are NOT full members, and we can still back out. Sadly every party bar UKIP are too f_cking spineless to pull out though. This is MY damn country, not being run by some twat by remote control in Brussels.

  95. Our membership of the EU was “snuck in”, RobN? Please, Lord Muck, remember your family’s 400 years of pure English breeding of which you have so proudly told us. Someone so vehemently proud of this island’s recent history and so vehemently antagonistic towards anything beyond this island’s borders ought not to be using lazy Yankee English.

    As for our membership of the EU. It was arranged by the politicians that this democracy chose to elect.

    Like it or lump it!

    1. gerry gable 23 Feb 2012, 4:02pm

      Why are professional gays always so boring?

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.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all