Reader comments · Telegraph: Government ‘risks reigniting anti-gay bigotry’ with equal marriage · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Telegraph: Government ‘risks reigniting anti-gay bigotry’ with equal marriage

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. The Telegraph (owned by catholics) is in error in assuming that anti-gay bigotry ever went away. If they are truly so concerned about us, perhaps they should consider not whipping up the bigoted mob instead and accepting some culpability in their role in perpetuating homophobia. They are behaving like bullies who say their victim is “asking for it” when all we ask for is the same equality that everyone else takes for bloody granted.

    1. Same old slippery slope fear-mongering fallacy at the end too.

  2. No. The telegraph is doing it’s best to re ignite homophobia. Perhaps they are trying to poach some of those holy people commenting in the mail?

    Reading some of those comments the proverbial martian would assume that churches would be bursting at the seams on sunday mornings.

    1. My thoughts exactly. This editorial sounds like it was written by Daily Hail poster bigot Melanie Phillips.

      1. …Daily Heil

    2. billywingartenson 20 Mar 2012, 8:00pm

      whiel in fact the church is all but dead in Europe.

      One must wonder if they will go back to their old ways to get more converts from the “heretic community”

      torture and mass murder

      BTw here’s another way they got more money and more converts…..

  3. So basically the Telegraph are saying that the endorse, encourage and support bigotry. They regard LGBT people as second class citizens and they will kowtow to the ignorant, deceptive and demeaning rhetoric of religious leaders at the expense of human rights of a large minority group.

    The Telegraph I had warmed to slightly over their exposure of the MPs expenses saga. They have now lost every shred of goodwill they had won with me. They are as vindictive, insidious and untruthful as those they seek to endorse – the anti-gay Institute.

    How a broadsheet newspaper that claims to use balanced and well thought out journalism can stoop to such demented and untruthful comments is unbelievable.

    1. Sister Mary Clarence 16 Mar 2012, 3:39pm

      “The Telegraph I had warmed to slightly over their exposure of the MPs expenses saga. ”

      I feel exactly the same way. I was very impressed with them over the expenses scandal, but my opinion of them has just nose-dived

  4. So let’s examine the logic here: promoting equality leads to increased bigotry?

    I cannot think of a sensible, grown-up response to that – what a load of facile bollocks!

  5. The Telegraph is doing a fine job itself in not jsut reigniting homophobia, but also fanning the flames to keep it well and truly alight!

    The CofE and RC Churches are damaging themselves by their disgusting rhetoric.

  6. Translation: Those uppity gays, getting above themselves. If they don’t know their place, someone will have to put them back in it.

    I am frankly disgusted that the Telegraph has lowered itself to such vile supremacist rhetoric.

    On the substantive point, it is absolute nonsense to suggest that the Human Rights Act could be used to force a church to conduct a wedding between a couple who do not meet its doctrinal requirements. Both British and European courts are committed to the freedom of religion, and at a minimum that means the right to conduct rituals as you see fit. That is why priests cannot be forced to marry divorcees, imams cannot be forced to marry Jews, and no church will ever be forced to marry a same-sex couple.

    But ironically the government’s attempt to dodge this issue by forbidding same-sex religious weddings outright is vulnerable, IMHO, to legal challenge. By not legislating on this now, the government may give more, not less, scope for court intervention.

    1. This. 100% this. In fact, you could almost read it as a veiled threat – that we should sit on the back of the bus and be quiet or we’ll be sorry….

    2. You are mistaken. The European Court of Human Rghts has this week in a French case said ‘if same-sex unions became lawful, any church that refuses to marry gay couples could be charged with discrimination.’

  7. I daresay those who opposed equality for women and black people over the last century forwarded similar ‘reasons’.
    “We’re not saying it would be us, but ‘someone’ might want to lynch them if they don’t get back in their box and accept the status quo.”

    As Valksy says, homophobia never went away, but what the Telegraph seems to be impying is that unless we stick to being second class citizens we should expect to be lynched.

    1. Flapjack

      I was going to post up the same point – but you have put it so succinctly I don’t need to! X

  8. yes and im sure the Telegraph will be there in the lead egging them on every step of the way!
    I actually went into my local church by mistake just after christmas (was supposed to be community centre next door) and there were 3 people there..hardly a broad cross section of the British population!

  9. Paddyswurds 16 Mar 2012, 11:12am

    “equality “runs into an immediate problem since there are powerful voices opposed in principle, notably the churches”. ….they would like to think they are still powerful, but they are badly deluded. One stroke of a pen and that is the end of the CofE, and the paedophile revelations that are daily coming to light in the Catholic church have spelled the end for that cult…it’s only a matter of time until the Vatican becomes a very ornate museum…. As for the Telegraph, well no need to state the obvious.

    1. billywingartenson 20 Mar 2012, 8:02pm

      A museum to mass murder and terror and torture in the name of God.

      If there was a god, the vatican which sits on the top of one of the hills of Rome, would have long ago been swallowed up in the lake of fire – those hills are volcanic in origin, and the fault line is a sshort distance east of rome.

  10. Get ready for several months of continuing threats and speculative scaremongering from the opposition. Yawnnn!

  11. Within the midst of an offensive report in the Telegraph there is a poll being run on marriage (please vote and demonstrate the strength of feeling!).

    Within the article, the RC church are at it again and saying gay relationships are merely friendships. Devalue, dehumanise, substandard treatment – the usual rhetoric of the Archbishops.


    1. TBH that poll is slightly biased in favour of a no-vote on gay marriage, given that the yes vote is split between yes without caveats and yes but not in a church where there’s only one box for no.

      1. True, but lets make sure the yes votes are higher than the no vote!

    2. LOL at that article. Apparently we’re just lifelong friends. We don’t have sex, we don’t share assets, and not one couple amongst us ever raises children.

      What a complete arse that man is :-)

    3. Robert in S. Kensington 16 Mar 2012, 12:46pm

      I just voted, but who knows if The Telegraph will see to it that the “Yes” votes for civil marriage equality won’t be tampered with, adjusted lower to reflect their bigotry? They’re not exactly known for truth-telling are they?

      1. At the moment the 2 yes options have 54.87% of the vote. Keep voting guys and gals!

        Yes (including in church) – 8144 votes
        Yes (not church) – 1760 votes
        No – 8145 votes

        Keep voting.

        Telegraph – weep!

        1. The “ayes” have it at the moment. How long, I wonder, before the Telegraph claims that their poll was “sabotaged by militant gay activists”?

    4. Paddyswurds 18 Mar 2012, 8:28pm


  12. Sounds like a threat to me. Why doesn’t the Telegraph just merge with the Catholic Herald already.

  13. Robert in S. Kensington 16 Mar 2012, 11:59am

    As if The catholic controlled Telegraph is that concerned about anti-gay bigotry, such bloody hypocrisy. It’s been a proponent of homophobia for decades with its snide, veiled comments, as bad as the Daily Mail. As for its asinine comment about making marriage a sacrament in the Anglican church, good luck with that one. The government doesn’t make ecclesiastical decisions and there is no way in hell civil marriage would ever become sacramental. It was invented by the state to allow divorced people to remarry for Pete’s sake and for those who didn’t want a religious ceremony.

    As for the procreation nonsense, that’s the lamest excuse around. Procreation isn’t the primary purpose of marriage, at least not civil marriage. If that were the case, there would be no use for infertile couples and those beyond child bearing years to contemplate marriage using that ridiculous fallacy. Typical bloody distortion of the facts and more importantly the truth.

  14. Equal marriage will ‘risk reigniting anti-homosexual bigotry’? When, exactly, was anti-gay bigotry extinguished?

  15. Most negged comment on Daily Mail article, of a similar ilk, is;

    ninety-eight per cent of P.i.n.k.N.e.w.s readers survey want full marriage equality (12 Aug 2010) And a new survey out from P.opulus shows sixty-five percent of the public support couples getting married, up from 61% in 2009. I hope that answers your questions.
    – Vala Mal Doran, P3X494, 16/3/2012 1:40
    Click to rate Rating -74

    It should perhaps be the Daily Mail and Telegraph who could merge, perhaps even bringing in some of the more unpleasant and dishonest Catholic news sites.

    The stories were bad enough, but the commenting was pure homophobia – the Telegraph blogs comments have a reputation for the more vile and unsettling racism, homophobia, sexism and xenophobia.

    1. there’s been a lot of homophobic ranting in the commentary in the Times too … They never went away …

      1. Dave North 16 Mar 2012, 1:45pm

        Mind you, the head count of comments in some of the Telegraphs dribblings has never exceeded 3000 comments and that includes PRO comments.

        Hardly representative of the UK as a whole.

        1. There is some entertaining arguing going on within the Telegraphs site at the moment – had a few comments removed by moderators due to how offensive they are.

          Bigoted, biased, blinkered and indoctrinated seems to account for the average contributer (with a handful of sane comments!)

  16. Craig Denney 16 Mar 2012, 12:12pm

    You can tell the Telegraph the archbishop of Canterbury has ‘resigned’ because he could not take the pressure.

    Our first big head to roll!!!

  17. Well, all hell broke loose when they ended segregation in Alabama but few now would say it wasn’t worth it. In the long run it will help to end bigotry. Duh!

  18. The Telegraph: The Daily Mail, but with longer words.

    1. Spanner1960 18 Mar 2012, 10:10am

      Obviously not an intelligent reader then.

  19. Channel 4 news report last night

    1. In the discussion, the woman from C4M claims that Holland has legalised marriage between three people, as part of her slippery slope intro. Is there any truth in that? I’ve never heard it before.

  20. it is not equal marriage that will increase anti-gay bigotry.

    It is this useless, unnecessary consulation which will do that.

    The government has given these extremists bigots in the religious cults (and their supporters in the far right press like the Telegraph) a period of 12 weeks to whip up all sorts of horrendous bigotry.

    1. The only thing I agree with the coalition of marriage on is that the consultation approach is objectionable. There is a problem with the law that compromises equal treatment of citizens in this country. It should be fixed immediately. There is no need to “consult” with bigots so that they can vent their spleen and whip up yet more homophobic rhetoric.

      1. Perhaps the consultation is a good thing. It may show how ridiculious some people are in their opposition.

  21. The resignation of Rowan Williams is all over the paper, but nothing yet from Pinknews. I know Pinknews is probably running on a shoestring (e.g., no posting on weekends) but I think you should try to do a better job getting in front of issues rather than waiting till other sources define issues for us.

    From today’s papers, notice how similar The Telegraph is to The Daily Mail, both strangely unified in surrounding “and racist emails” with hypens. Is this some coordinated strategy to minimize Dr. Sentamu’s blatant homophobia by counterposing the racist comments of some anonymous emailers?

    From The Telegraph:
    More recently, he attracted controversy – and racist emails – when he spoke out against gay marriage. Dr Sentamu is married with two grown-up children and two grown-up foster children.

    From the Daily Mail
    He attracted controversy – and racist emails – when he spoke out against this issue.

    1. Maybe you should blame the people who sent the racist emails for giving ammunition to the bigots, because they do weaken our position as the innocent party, with their vile correspondence.

      You’d think people who had experienced discrimination because of their sexuality would know better than to discriminate against people because of the colour of their skin. (To invert an argument frequently utilised on this site)

      1. I find racist comments from gay people disappointing for precisely that reason. It only serves to show that the argument gay people are just like their heterosexual counterparts stands for negative qualities too.

  22. Interesting to read the Telegraphs comment.

    It appears they assert that the rank homophobia being used by the religious extremists is the fault of Lynne Featherstone.

    They seem to suggest that because the Equalities Minister proposes improving equality for gay people that it is her fault others respond with dark age homophobia.

    Thats about as sensible as saying that when the US introduced inter-racial marriage that the politicians who sought to ensure fairness were to blame for the racial violence of the KKK.

    Come on Telegraph, you may be biased and have your policy dictated to you by the RC church. You may be in the pocket of C4M. But surely even you can come up with a better argument than that!

    1. “You may be in the pocket of C4M. But surely even you can come up with a better argument than that!” – I doubt they can. I have not heard a single argument against marriage equality that can’t be traced back to homophobia.

  23. Lynda Yilmaz 16 Mar 2012, 1:20pm

    When will these religious idots recognise, that homophobic bigotry (or every other bigotry come to that) has it’s very roots in religion! The only place for religion in todays world is ini the hearts and minds of the gullible ignorant.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 16 Mar 2012, 4:04pm

      And in the Daily Mail and Telegraphy it seems.

  24. So? Since when has The Daily Telegraph and its readership worried about anti-gay bigotry? This is the paper FOR bigots. And is there anyone who considers themselves ‘religious’ who actually understands what the adjective ‘civil’ means? Dictionaries a bit too heavy to handle, are they? What do words like ‘sacrament’ have to do with the current debate? And if marriage is a sacrament, how does the church view civil marriage, which appeals to no sacrament? Are the offspring of such marriages all bastards, according to the religious? The mind boggles.

    1. Spanner1960 18 Mar 2012, 9:59am

      Well, as a right wing (not Tory) gay atheist, I find the Telegraph to be generally one of the best and most unbiased of all the UK papers. Sure, it has it’s leanings, but then show me a paper that is truly independent. (yes, including The Independent)

      I strongly resent being called a bigot.

  25. johnny33308 16 Mar 2012, 2:35pm

    What a bunch of hysterical old women living in the Dark Ages the Telegraph appears to be! It’s article seems to try to ignite the anti-gay bigotry and hysteria it purports to report about! Shall we once again REMIND them that this is CIVIL MARRIAGE and no church has any business being involved in this area whatsoever…it is Civil Marriage, so go away and mind your religious business, fools, or shall we inject our Civil business into your religion? This is what you risk by interefering in Civil matters…so be warned…leave Civil Matters to civil society or we shall intervene in your religion, permanently…YOU CHOOSE! Your bigotry is tiring and shows your true nature, which is NOT love, nor is it Christian…it is quite evil, in fact….so beware!

  26. johnny33308 16 Mar 2012, 2:45pm

    The State and the church are separate for a reason…their interests do NOT overlap, and in fact, compliment each other. The State does not interfere in religious matters and the church does not interfere in Civil Matters….oh, wait a minute, the church DOES interfere in Civil Matters, so perhaps the State should begin interfering in religious matters…let us tax all the churches, it is a good start, then we need to limit them considerably and shrink their holdings and powers in all areas. Then we can really get to work on eliminating them entirely from the memory of mankind forever…they have proven how irrelevant their “beliefs” are to our Civil Society and they will never mind their own business, so they need to be eliminated for the benefit of Civil Society. Legislate them into oblivion… about a vote on their right to exist?

    1. Church and state are not separate in the UK. The Church of England has been the established church in this country for over 400 years – Henry VIII and all that.

  27. Pink News: – “Telegraph: Government ‘risks reigniting anti-gay bigotry’ with equal marriage”

    But isn’t that exactly what the Telegraph wants?

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 16 Mar 2012, 4:03pm

      It’s what it’s been doing for decades in tandem with the Daily Mail. Losers always come up with the most absurd statements when they know they’re losing the battle. It’s nothing more than desperation.

  28. This argument about being being ‘borrn homosexual’ If people don’t want to be different, eg homosexual and didn’t choose to be, then why don’t they change? Instead of protesting about how they ‘didnt choose’ and making excuses.

    There are plenty of services out there to help these people to transit from being gay or lesbian, so there is really no excuse to say that they don’t want to be different when they are opportunities to change, it would take work and commitment, but they would rather bully and abuse others to accepting them.

    I feel Homosexuals are getting far too many rights, and privileges and our Government will regret what they are doing, and they won’t get another term should this pointless law be passed and even when it is passed they can only be partnered in registry offices and it won’t be called marriage. Civil partnerships yes, same sex marriage no.

    1. Separate but equal never is. Pick up a book and learn something. Again, you are trying to assert authority and insight on the subject when you possess neither. So stop, before you embarrass yourself further.

    2. LGBT people don’t have privileges based on their sexuality, straight people do.

    3. Robert in S. Kensington 16 Mar 2012, 7:30pm

      The day you and your rabble can provide the evidence that a heterosexual can change his or her orientation, then maybe your statement might hold some credence;but until then, you remain the delusional, ill-informed fool every time you write something here.

      Pink News, kindly remove this dimwit.

      1. As I said, it would take work and commitment, but again, not one homosexual will attempt it, as they are lazy, inferior and enjoy bullying and causing trouble to normal respectable people of society.

        Why don’t you try to change and then report back? You cant say that you cant change, if you haven’t event made a attempt to!

        1. The average gay person earns more than the average heterosexual – higher disposable income (ever heard of the pink pound?)

          Bullying – try looking in the mirror or at the anti-gay institute or the Cardinal if you want to see bullying.

          Causing trouble – no seeking human rights

          Change – er I can’t I don’t have a choice in who I am attracted to – and I don’t want to – I like being gay and being true to how I was created!

          Did you choose to be heterosexual. Did you try out the other options to make your decision.


          1. I dont accept the the pink pound in my line of business.

            Yes Stu, you bully, you and your homosexual cronies, bring on yourselves what happens to you, the ‘abuse’ the ‘comments’, and then lay the blame at others. ( Not surprising for an ex copper)

            Causing trouble, yes, making comments about stalking or trying to find out where David Hart is, and the details of The Coalition of Marriage.

            You can change Stu, you were not created homosexual, you were created from two hetrosexuals, i would be very disapointed to be your parents.

            To be heterosexual you do not choose, it is how you are born, homosexuality is a choice.

            Idiot, no sir your the idiot, thinking everyone will believe your tactics, boy I wait the day hostility increases, and the homosexuals will wish that they had not messed with society.

          2. “boy I wait the day hostility increases, and the homosexuals will wish that they had not messed with society.”

            WOW. I think if anyone should be questioning their parents disappointment in them it should be you. You really think this is something a responsible human being should be saying to anyone? You may disagree with homosexuality, that’s your view. But you would be happy to see an increase in hostility in this country towards anyone?

          3. @Aiden

            More fool you for not accepting the money in your business.

            But if you are a militant homophobe then your arrogant bullying rhetoric is more important than your budget.

            When you say David Hart, do you mean Colin Hart? See you can’t even get your allegations right.

            You are so laughable!

          4. “and the homosexuals will wish that they had not messed with society.”

            Pathetic. The only place you can utter that hateful tripe is anonymously on a gay site, how utterly brave of you.

            Its why your kind is dying out, and not a moment too soon either. You are a disgrace to humanity.

        2. You do realise that those who tend to assume that sexuality is highly mutable and can be changed at will are projecting their own experience on to others and assuming that we all are like them? You think there is a choice involved because, for you, there is.

        3. Spanner1960 18 Mar 2012, 10:09am

          How do you know you too are not homosexual?
          Have you tried it? No? I thought not.
          Why not? Don’t give me crap about “the natural way” and “God’s will” – it is the way you were born, and cannot be changed any more than we cannot change either. I had many straight relationships until I was 31 and simply did not feel right about my life. So please don’t patronise us with all this sh|t about “not trying” – I spent half my life coming to terms with my sexuality – how long have you spent trying to understand other people’s situations?

    4. Why do you care so much, Aiden? Why are you even THINKING about LGBT people if you’re straight?

      And most people (straight and gay) have no objection at all to being different so they don’t WANT to change – just to be treated equally, whether their difference is in gender, age, race, sexuality etc. Only the insecure fear people simply because they’re different. Why not spend the time you waste on PN sorting out your own issues and insecurities?

      1. Iris, is that your birth name? Or one to go with your chosen lifestyle?

        I have issues, with militant homosexuals, bullying normal people of society, same sex marriage will not happen, and if it does, hostility towards homosexuals will rise and rightly so, no one likes bullies.

        1. Ignore the arrogant indoctirnated troll

          1. Oh its the militant homosexual ex copper / paramedic who beens on ‘sick leave’ …you still off Stu? Manage to stalk David Hart yet? Given up looking for him huh?

            David Burrowes is right, we should not extend marriage to homosexuals, they have a fair equivalent. ‘If will come out of how’

            Oh and Stu, you will never silence my right to free speech or my campaign to keep marriage for those that rightfuly deserve it.

          2. Aiden or is it Matthew or Samuel?

            His name is COLIN Hart … learn to read.

            Back at work week after next.

            You know us public servents get injured in the line of duty to serve ignorant bigots like you – regardless of your arrogance.

          3. Oh and I would never want to silence you for two reasons. I value responsiblly exercised freedom of speech. Secondly, you make yourself look idiotic without me even trying – so silencing you would make life much less amusing.

        2. Which is why you spend so much of your time on a gay website? Yes, you certainly appear to have issues.

          1. ‘njured in the line of duty’ how can you get injured when all you coppers do it sit around all day btw is it Durham you still work for, as they cant find you, and have never seen anyone that looks like you working as a copper recently…

            Oh and you admit to knowing Colin Hart name good stuff.

            I dont spent as much time on here as our skiving ‘copper’ does, I do hope we are not paying him while he is off.

            ‘I value responsiblly exercised freedom of speech’
            really, so why do you cry homophobe when someone exsercies their right to say what they think of you? Rather childish playground behaviour.

            ‘If will come out of how’.

        3. Spanner1960 18 Mar 2012, 10:14am

          Bullying? How about the worm that turned?
          Your lot have been bullying us for centuries and at least we are gaining the upper hand, and like all natural bullies, you are also cowards that choose to pick on those weaker than yourselves. Well get used to it sunshine, we are not going away any time soon.

    5. Dr Robin Guthrie 18 Mar 2012, 12:20pm

      What a pr!ck,,,,,

  29. “,,but the ramifications may be far more profound than Mr Cameron has anticipated, not least for the future relationship between the established Church and the state”

    Isn’t that a good thing?

    1. Perhaps the Church of England would do better to worry about how it will handle the royal succession. Old Bet isn’t getting any younger and will pass the throne over to a man who is a known divorcee, adulterer and whose behaviour drove his wife to the point of a nervous break down and suicide attempts. Not exactly a shining example for the marriage they want to protect.

  30. Don Harrisoin 16 Mar 2012, 11:52pm

    To say :- The Telegraph says some gays “resent being treated differently, even though they can now enter into a civil partnership with the same legal rights as a married couple”.
    Do they not know that the civil partnership bill does not work should one of the parners have gender reasignment? The whole thing ihas to start again?

    1. In this, the Telegraph is spot on. I DO resent being treated differently. The reason for being treated differently is simply because of other people’s bigotry. “You have to drink from this water fountain – it’s the same water, but we don’t want the likes of you using ours”, “You have to sit at the back of the bus – the seats are the same, but you’re not good enough to sit at the front”. Answer as to why the “separate but equal” system needs to be “separate” and you have your answer as to why we resent it.

  31. 44% of Telegraph readers are 65+.

    63% are 55+.

    Only 23% are under 45.

    The Barclay twins are 77.

    So the Telegraph isn’t exactly the future voice of Britain !


    1. Spanner1960 18 Mar 2012, 10:01am

      Pray tell me what is? The Daily Mirror? The Grauniad? Or maybe the Sport, because that features lots of lesbian romps apparently.

  32. I see you have to post under the name “Aiden” to get your ridiculous point across. The obsession with Stu gives it away every time. You really are retarded, aren’t you? LOL! Run out of JD, have we? Try Domestos instead, cheaper for those on social security like you.

    1. LMAO! Yeah, everyone who comes in here is utterly as obsessed with Stu as you are. Of course, how silly of me not to notice that before.

      The problem with being mad like you, is you make the fallacy of assuming everyone is equally as mentally damaged. Its why all you can do is make pathetic insults here. Whats it like being powerless? Still trying to “run me over” with your linguistic prowess, hmmm?

      Just when I think you can’t make me laugh any more, it actually gets better….

  33. Yeah, I don’t want a civil partnership, I want civil marriage and I don’t give a damn with what people think of it. When they legalized interracial marriage, there was still racism people got over it just like they’ll get over homosexual marriages.

  34. You should see the number of comments on this discussion forum 3308(!) and many of them vitriolic racist, xenophobic and homophobic comments. There are a few great gay people giving them as good as they get. I am finding it quite entertaining with my popcorn watching it! Would love to see Will, Iris, Spanner or anyone else joining in!

  35. Paddyswurds 18 Mar 2012, 8:11pm

    ………It is just so gratifying to watch all these bigoted creeps getting so desperate in a fight they started themselves and a fight they are destined to lose so utterly spectacularly. We are living in interesting times to say the least. Who could ever have envisioned that those who supposedly espouse love and Humanity would end up being so evil, hate filled and divisive. But wait, I’m wrong as a cursory glance through their so called holy book dictated by the sky fairy will reveal. They have always been evil, hate filled and divisive because that is the only way they can have the delusion of power they so desperately crave. Again it is just so much fun watching them wriggle like a worm on a fish hook. The victory will be so sweet and boy will we crow….

  36. New Aussie 19 Mar 2012, 5:22am

    Several people have said the telegraph is catholic owned. The Barclay brothers are actually Anglican by adoption although their parents were Scottish catholic. The editorial line has actually not changed much from the former Jewish proprietor, Conrad Black. It is not religion but social conservatism of the type that still dominates the Tory party (despite the modernism of David Cameron) that informs this particular line in both the telegraph and the mail.

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.