Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

US gay group urges CNN not to use guests from the ‘anti-gay industry’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. “To discuss gay marriage we have our first guest, Dr Ahmadinejad of Iran, who says gays don’t exist and if they did they will be stoned to death. We are very fair and balanced.”

  2. WTF? Where does GLAAD get off in making these creative and editorial demands? It’s a pity that CNN will need to waste time in dignifying their whining with a response. We need to be careful before we are perceived as being the “Zionists” of sexuality.

  3. Hmmm, so gay lobbies are attempting to influence what news broadcasters can say on both sides of the Atlantic now, are they? Is it a mental defect that makes a militant faction seem hell bent on destroying freedom of speech come what may? Do the inciters of censorship such as GLAAD and Pink News not realise that they are imploring us all to teeter on a slippery slope into fascism? That’s where this is all ultimately heading.

  4. Les and William are insane homophobe sympathisers. Gay lobbies, fascism, Zionism, they are truly mad!

  5. Steve@GayWebHosting 8 Jan 2011, 9:54am

    @YuriFury

    I agree. No-one is suggesting (or wanting) to free press to be gagged in any way.

    My understanding is that they are asking that so-called ´experts´… Those called in to give their ´expert opinion´ on news stories actually ARE experts in their fields… and not simply bible-bashing homophobes?

    Again, I think that free-speech comes with responsibilities. Some of these very vocal homophobes need to be held to account for the damage their ´free speech´ causes. The gay teens bullied to the point of suicide as their peers heard that homosexuality was ´wicked and evil´ and that gay people should be killed for example!

  6. Les wrote
    “WTF? Where does GLAAD get off in making these creative and editorial demands?”

    JohnK’s response
    In what way is homophobic language creative, unless you mean providing a climate in which abuse can perpetuate unlicensed.

    . . . . . . . . . .

    Les wrote
    “It’s a pity that CNN will need to waste time in dignifying their whining with a response.”

    JohnK’s response
    Why are you not concerned about the dignity of LGBT people?

    . . . . . . . . . .

    Les wrote
    “We need to be careful before we are perceived as being the “Zionists” of sexuality.”

    JohnK’s response
    Why should homophobic language be so intrinsically linked to defining homosexuality, unless you want to perpetuate a sexuality which is a legitimate target for abuse?

  7. William wrote
    “Hmmm, so gay lobbies are attempting to influence what news broadcasters can say on both sides of the Atlantic now, are they? “

    JohnK’s response
    William . . . is there no link between being able to promote defamatory language towards LGBT people in the media, and actual incidences of homophobic violence on the streets?

    . . . . . . . . . .

    William wrote
    “Is it a mental defect that makes a militant faction seem hell bent on destroying freedom of speech come what may? “

    JohnK’s response
    William . . . . so is free speech in your mind then, the abdication of all responsibility with regards the consequences of what is implicitly promoted in the media?

    . . . . . . . . . .

    William wrote
    “Do the inciters of censorship such as GLAAD and Pink News not realise that they are imploring us all to teeter on a slippery slope into fascism? That’s where this is all ultimately heading.”

    JohnK’s response
    William . . . so fascism is about LGBT asking the media not to promote defamatory language, against LGBT people.

  8. The Judge 8 Jan 2011, 4:46pm

    @ William,
    Are you being serious? I can’t work it out? Is your comment satire? Or are you just homophobic? Or stupid? Or both?

    @ Les,
    LOL, what exactly is a zionist of sexuality?

  9. The title of this article obviously helped bring that kind of people here to comment… Go back to Yahoo where you belong, you yahoos.

  10. “Do the inciters of censorship such as GLAAD and Pink News not realise that they are imploring us all to teeter on a slippery slope into fascism?”

    No over reaction there. Oh, no, not at all.

    Time for a Valium, there’s a good chap.

  11. Steve@GayWebHosting: Yes, you are absolutely right, with freedom of speech must come responsibility and accountability, but seeking to censor anyone outright on the grounds that you do not agree with their beliefs, however unreasonable they may appear, IS a step towards fascism, and I will attempt to explain why.

    Now, I deplore the BNP as much as the next gay man, but I do not agree as most people on here would that they should be silenced into obscurity. Dare I mention for anyone who hasn’t read today;s papers that it was the BNP who attempted to warn the mainstream media years ago that a disproportionate subset of Muslim men appeared to be preying on young white (yes, white – shock!) girls, raping and abusing them simply for their own deranged kicks? For trying to bring this cultural problem to light the BNP were muzzled by the press and attacked by the liberal Guardianistas for speaking the unmentionable (ie: being politically incorrect). Well, their “lie” turned out to be the elephant in the room that this past week became too big to ignore any longer, and suddenly those same Guardian readers are demanding to know why their daily paper has been duping them for so long, even as one of its dafter leftie journos – the insane Libby Brooks – pathetically attempts to maintain the lie in one of the most squalid pieces of journalism ever committed to print:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/07/grooming-racialising-crime-tradition

    Check it out. It’s there for all to see on today’s Guardian web site. The point is, had this truth been spoken ten years ago and acted upon then, then countless young girls may have been spared their ordeal, but ended up suffering in the name of censorship/political correctness.

    Similarly, censorship/PC within our own community can be said to be harming gay men. For example, HIV charities have censored all mention of the nastier consequences of HIV infection and the side effects of consuming antivirals from their campaigns for years and HIV conversion rates are now at record levels – because many gay men no longer regard the virus as a serious problem, although it remains a chronic disease.

    Stymying one side of a debate in the name of political correctness/ censorship is simply not the way forward in a fair, rational and civilized society. So again, I say, deal with it!

  12. @william

    Out of interest, do you think the BBC was in any way unreasonable when they posed a question asking the public: Should homosexuals face execution?

  13. Steve@GayWebHosting 8 Jan 2011, 11:40pm

    @William…

    Or… should white people still be allowed to keep black people as slaves?

    (Some) opinions are just NOT wanted or needed in a so-called enlightened world…

    I also do not believe in censorship… However, I also wanted to be treated equally and fairly… especially by media companies that I HAVE to pay for.

    For example, on the issue of fairness….

    If the BBC were reporting the news of a ´happy event´… that being the birth of a child (by surrogacy or not), to a mixed-race celebrity couple, then brought on an ´expert´ from the BNP to decry their suitability to be parents… on the basis of their mixed-race… Would THAT be ´fair and balanced´? I very much doubt it.

    Likewise, if CNN had brought on clear racists to provide ´balance´ on a piece about black soldiers serving in the military, would THAT be seen as ´balanced and fair´ reporting.. I really think that it is time for people to get over themselves and move on…

    I am not commenting here on the general issue of ´freedom of the press´… I am commenting on this individual issue..

  14. William wrote
    “Stymying one side of a debate in the name of political correctness/ censorship is simply not the way forward in a fair, rational and civilized society. So again, I say, deal with it!”

    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    William . . . In what way is defamation of LGBT people a legitimate debate,

    William . . . In what way is saying no to verbal violence a form of political correctness.

    William . . . In what way does allowing defamation of LGBT people lead to a fair, rational and civil society for LGBT people to live in

  15. William, you are telling cockroach as eagle, showing religious fanatic as voice of reasoned unbiased opposition to gays is not rational, BBC show man who wants death to gays as normal Christian voices, this is not true, you do not show BNP in news show about blacks adopting whites.

    You so far in drain you not see cow.

  16. “Stymying one side of a debate in the name of political correctness/ censorship is simply not the way forward in a fair, rational and civilized society. So again, I say, deal with it!”

    This is nonsense. I’m sorry but it is. I’m all for freedom of speech and expression, but freedom of expression is not the right to persecute and encourage others to do harm to sections of society based on belief or otherwise. Your idea that all speech is permissible in society is naive and slightly simplistic, otherwise neither libel or slander would exists in law to protect others for “free speech” which is lies.

  17. Perhaps we should extend a kind hand to persons like Stephen Green who try to hide their profound emptyness & sadness behind a show of anti-gay anger… (lol)

  18. I am simply stating that stymying debate by cutting off the opposing viewpoint altogether is neither fair, reasonable nor, dare I say, rational in a civilized society. It is reactionary, and knee-jerk behaviour like this that has led to the breakdown of society over the past decade, because political correctness has forbade people from speaking the simple truth about myriad topics that should be being openly debated, from unsustainability of unfettered immigration (“racist!”) to the rampant spread of HIV in the gay community (“homophobe!”). Britain is broken thanks to political correctness and the stymying of open debate.

  19. “because political correctness has forbade people from speaking the simple truth”

    Truth? What “truth”? We are not arguing that any facts or truth be removed, but a religious “truth” that a man who returned from the dead 2,000 years ago is telling someone to discriminate against gay people, is NOT truth. Just becuase a bunch of inbred swamp hicks believe it means nothing, numeracy does not increase validation. Religion is a belief, not a truth.

    You seem to lack a basic understanding of free speech, something repeatability common among your posts here, and you seem to be completely intransigent on improving your understanding of what “free speech” actually is, no matter what people tell you.

    Let me help:

    Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights defines free speech as “the right to hold opinions without interference. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression”

    According to the Freedom Forum Organisation, and most legal systems in democratic countries, freedom of speech must not conflict with other values or rights, based on the “harm principle” or the “offence principle”.

    [Harm Principle: “”Libertarians believe that individuals should have complete freedom of action, provided their actions do not infringe on the freedom of others” – Encyclopædia Britannica]

    Ergo, the right to free speech in a democracy is permissible only when that freedom is not used to remove the rights of others, or encourage harm to others.

    I find it difficult to understand where your lack of comprehension is of this simple principle of democracy.

  20. Will . . . very eloquently put

    “You seem to lack a basic understanding of free speech, something repeatability common among your posts here, and you seem to be completely intransigent on improving your understanding of what “free speech” actually is, no matter what people tell you.”

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

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all