Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Nicolas Sarkozy affirms view of family as ‘a mother and a father’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. This coming from a man who has been married several times with children by several different women?

    I think that it could be safe to say that he will have just lost himself votes from many people from the LGBT communities but also their families too!

    As they say in France imbécile!

    1. billywingartenson 18 Apr 2012, 7:08am

      Just another of the ‘kings” referred to by Diederot when he said mankind will be free when the last king is strangled with the guts of the last priest.

      At least he didnt UNexcommunicate holocaust denier williamson, as RATZInger did.

      Here’s hoping the socialist wins.

    2. billywingartenson 18 Apr 2012, 7:10am

      I thank you for telling us how Sarkozy has supported the traditional marriage – one man one woman.

      At least he’s not as bad as the pope and his priests who support traditional marriage by raping children

  2. What a hypocrite – how can you be against homophobia and against marriage equality. That’s like saying that you are against racism yet pro-apartheid!

    It is so sad that he is not more like David Cameron in his attitude to marriage equality. If right wing Cameron can do it then why not Sarko?

    Hopefully Hollande will get in and lead on introducing marriage equality.

  3. Another of these “we’re all equal, some are just more equal than others” idealists. Yawn. Boot him out.

  4. Good grief. Only the most idiotic, ignorant, dim-witted, putrid sack of cr@p thinks that all it takes to make a family is DNA donors. The lowest of lack-witted cretins can spawn children, it’s not bloody magic. There is more to a family than that.

    And not only should LGBT people (who often have families of their own) be bloody offended, but so should anyone raising foster children or with adopted children because he thinks that the only definition of family is one sperm provider and one egg provider.

    Of course, Mr Sarkozy will be moving to immediately annul the marriage of people who have not had children, of any woman past menopause and anyone who fails a fertility test – Because in his blinkered world marriage and families only count when there are kids.

  5. I hope he loses.

  6. Well looks like Sarkozy has lost a great number of LGBT votes – well from the general political consensus it looks like he has lost a lot of votes across the entire electorate. Even Chirac (who is usually an ally) is said to be not supporting Sarkozy.

    1. de Villiers 18 Apr 2012, 11:58am

      Chirac would rather swallow snakes than support Sarkozy. That is nothing new.

      1. Prospective runoff polls between the two leading candidates indicate Hollande would win by a margin between 6% and 10%.

        It doesnt help that Sarkozy has been caught out lying in his campaigning.

        Other reporting from France is not in Sarkozy’s favour:
        “Nicolas Sarkozy’s campaign appeared to lose steam Wednesday, four days ahead of the first round of France’s presidential election that pollsters increasingly say he will lose to his Socialist rival.

        Abandoned by some allies and rounded on by some traditionally pro-government media, a visibly tired but still campaigning Sarkozy said on Wednesday “we’re three days away from the first round, let’s wait peacefully.”

        He dismissed a CSA opinion poll ahead of Sunday’s first round vote that said Socialist Party candidate Francois Hollande would score a thumping first-round victory over the UMP party’s incumbent with 29 percent to 24 percent.”

  7. So he and his first wife did not make up a family as they didn’t have children, but he was/is part of a family with his second and third wives. OK. That makes such a lot of sense.

    Dipstick.

    1. Correction (thanks, Robert in S Kensington): it’s even worse, he did have 2 children with his first wife.

  8. You may define marriage as one man, one woman. I currently define you as a repugnant hypocrit about to leave office. Thanks for the extra nail in your coffin

  9. spiritbody 17 Apr 2012, 5:45pm

    This is so silly. If you ‘believe’ that a family consists of a mother and father and their child or children, then all you need do is just look around you. You’ll soon see that family comes in all shapes and sizes. I guess homophobes see only what they wanna see.

  10. Robert in S. Kensington 17 Apr 2012, 5:56pm

    Music to the ears of C4M and its vile supporters! So much for the French myth of liberty, equality, fraternity. Might as well leave out the first two.

    In Sarkozy’s narrow, bigoted mind, even widows and widowers with children would not comprise a family. I’m surprised an enlightened society such as the French wouldn’t take issue with his patriarchal view of “family”. Using his m.o. his first marriage should have been annulled since it produced no offspring. What a bloody hypocrite. Let’s hope he loses the election to Hollande.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 17 Apr 2012, 6:03pm

      He kow-tows to the dominant roman cult in France. No surprise there, after all, he’s a serial adulterer.

      Correction to a previous comment. Sarkozy did have two children with his first wife. It was his second wife with whom he had none. He’s now on his third marriage to Carla Bruni.

      1. Thanks Robert, but he did have a son with his second wife too – 4 children in all, by 3 different mothers. Such enthusiasm for the institution of marriage!

  11. Peter & Michael 17 Apr 2012, 6:55pm

    Another homophobe, that is in denial of others whom are Gay not being able to form a relationship. We hope he loses his presidency!

  12. “To my knowledge and the current state of scientific knowledge, it requires a man and a woman to have a child.”

    So screw all the gay couples who want to get married and raise children via adoption/surrogacy.

    Believe me, we’ll do a lot better job than some of the ‘people’ I see crawling around outer Manchester.

  13. bobbleobble 17 Apr 2012, 9:09pm

    If the opinion polls are to be believe, and that’s a big if, Sarkozy will be looking for another job very shortly (no pun intended). Hollande and the socialists have (as far as I can remember) have pledged to introduce marriage equality although that is dependent on them winning a majority in the lower house of government which is by no means certain, even if Hollande wins the presidency.

    With things so close it seems odd that Sarkozy has decided to alienate a voting block but then he’s had to dash to the right during this election to prevent him from being this election’s Lionel Jospin. I’d love to see him lose in the first round but that’s not very likely.

    1. de Villiers 17 Apr 2012, 10:30pm

      Are you mad? That would mean the FN would make the second round.

      1. bobbleobble 17 Apr 2012, 11:43pm

        Not at all, Melanchon on the left is doing just as well as Marine Le Penn and it wouldn’t trouble me at all to see two left wingers go through to the second round.

        1. de Villiers 18 Apr 2012, 11:30am

          I would prefer Melanchon to go through to the second round over Le Pen – but I think that is fantasy.

          1. bobbleobble 18 Apr 2012, 11:37am

            Since neither of them are going through the next round the whole line of conversation is moot but I was simply pointing out that wishing to see Sarkozy humiliated does not mean that I therefore want the FN in the second round.

          2. de Villiers 18 Apr 2012, 11:47am

            Even if you want Sarko to be humiliated, the best way is for him to lose to Hollande in a second round. The best outcome is always a PS / UMP second round. Otherwise there is the real risk of the FN making it through – which is always the worst outcome.

          3. de Villiers 18 Apr 2012, 11:51am

            I should add that for all I disagree with Melanchon, and in particular his claim to be for the continued revolution and la lutte ouvrière despite having spent years sat on a comfortable seat in the Palais Luxembourg, he demolished Le Pen in the television debate.

          4. de Villiers 18 Apr 2012, 12:10pm

            Palais du Luxembourg

  14. Most of the French polls I’ve seen seem to indicate that Francois Hollande will win the presidency, given the unpopularity of Sarkozy- and the Socialists support marriage equality.

  15. twodadsdotorg 17 Apr 2012, 9:39pm

    Next time anyone says the EU is ‘more advanced’ than the US/UK, here’s proof they aren’t. Thanks for all the work you do – feel free to follow us/our blog in our work for family equality. @twodadsdotorg, http://www.twodads.org

  16. Then why did he marry a pig instead of a real woman.

    1. de Villiers 17 Apr 2012, 10:31pm

      Are you stupid? Is this a proper response?

  17. Sarkozy is a strong man, and the UK could learn a lot from him, he banned the buka, he deports without questions asked and is not afraid to say no, you have to respect this man.

    1. Here endeth the lesson of the white supremacist, Aiden

    2. I’m sure you admire his approach to the sanctity of marriage in particular, Aiden.

    3. Religion is insanity in trolls. 18 Apr 2012, 11:56am

      Aiden loves strong men he learns a lot from them but he hasn’t got to the really hard lesson about how not to be utterly boring yet. He has passed with flying colours how to be a self hating closet case, how to dribble down his chin while watchin gay porn, and how to be a religious delusional. Try reading some Jean Genet you’ll learn so much more about yourself Aiden my pet than all the promulgations from Sarkozy the adulterous Catholic hypocrite.

      1. chris lowcase 18 Apr 2012, 1:28pm

        try not to feed the trolls. if anything your responses will be taken out of context when the OPs are deleted ;) .

        if the logic in a trolls posts was consistent, we would call them ‘people with opposing veiws’ rather than ‘idiot trolls’.

  18. de Villiers 17 Apr 2012, 10:39pm

    For those of you who want Sarko to lose, remember that France is in financial catastrophe, it has not balanced it’s books in 27 years, it is bankrupt, there is no will for reform and if France collapses so does Europe. I deplore Sarko’s policy here but with France downgraded to AAB and heading towards default, there are more serious, immediate issues.

    Regardless as to policy, for those wanting Hollande to win, he is a return to the paternalistic, privileged, self-appointed politicians who have all but wrecked the French economy. Imagine David Cameron but more privileged.

    Hollande may win because the French cannot bear to be dragged ino the present century or face the reality of their economic situation – and Hollande promises more fake economic trinkets.

    Bring gay does not mean that every political decision has to revolve around the single issue of gay marriage.

    1. de Villiers 17 Apr 2012, 10:39pm

      -its

      1. bobbleobble 17 Apr 2012, 11:50pm

        Hold on, before getting all high and mighty, the UMP have been in charge of the lower house in France for 10 years along with an UMP president and senate throughout that time. If France is on the verge of collapse perhaps at least some of the blame has to go to the right wing and Sarkozy? After all they’ve had plenty of time to do something about it.

        1. de Villiers sounds like conservatives in America who blame Obama and the Democrats for the collapse of the economy in spite of the fact that the economy completely collapsed in 2008 BEFORE the election and at the end of EIGHT YEARS of a Republican President and SIX years of REPUBLICAN control of the House AND Senate.

          Now we’re being told that the way to fix the economy is to turn it over to the very same people who ran it into the ground in the first place.

          If there is a Tea Party in France, de Villiers must be a member.

          1. de Villiers 18 Apr 2012, 11:31am

            Are you mad?

          2. de Villiers 18 Apr 2012, 11:40am

            I am for markets but not le capitalisme sauvage.

      2. de Villiers 18 Apr 2012, 11:38am

        I agree – the UMP have been marginally better than would have been the PS over the past five years. The PS would have been disastrous. There have been some good reforms from Sarko but not enough and he has disappointed.

        Still, that is preferable to the alternative. At least Sarko promises some reforms, even if timid. Hollande makes promises that he must know are empty.

        The only possible saving of Hollande winning is that the government under Jospin implemented more economic privatisation than all previous centre-right governments in their totality. Perhaps it is only the left that could do that? Still, the 35 hour week crippled France, it is now all but ignored and, unlike before, Melanchon is pushing the PS further to the left.

        Sadly, I really think that France is not ready to look at the realities and that is likely to cause chaos in Europe and that such catastrophe is more likely to happen under Hollande. I would have preferred DSK.

        There is more here than just gay marriage.

        1. bobbleobble 18 Apr 2012, 11:43am

          You have absolutely no idea how the PS would have performed in the last 5 years but the UMP have been in charge for 10 years and as a result of their governance France finds itself losing its triple A rating. Can you not accept that the problems France is currently facing are as a result of the party you want to keep in power?

        2. de Villiers 18 Apr 2012, 11:55am

          I agree that the UMP have not been good enough on the reforms. But I think that the PS would have been worse – and they opposed even the minor reforms proposed by Fillon.

          Promising to hire tens of thousands of new teachers to add to the public sector civil service bill and to turn back the increase in the pension age from 62 to 60 is economic suicide. It is grossly irresponsible.

          None of the politicians have the strength to tell the French how good their lives are but how bad their economic situation is. The UMP at least tries to trick the country into reforms. The PS do not even bother to do that, whilst opposing EU market reforms and the EU constitution which would further strengthen the economy.

          1. bobbleobble 18 Apr 2012, 2:21pm

            Again I’ll ask, although don’t expect a response, why would you want to keep a party in power whose policies have led France to the situation it is currently in? It’s the UMP who have been in charge for the last 10 years, Sarkozy and his ilk when in charge when France lost its triple A rating. It’s their fault and yet you seem determined to believe that they can dig France out of the mess that they caused. Perhaps it’s time for a change since the UMP are clearly useless. Or maybe you’d like to see France downgraded even further.

          2. de Villiers 18 Apr 2012, 4:19pm

            It should be clear, really. I do not think that the UMP are responsible for the financial catastrophe and banking crises that led to the American and European recession.

            The fault of losing the AAA rating is not confined to that of the UMP. It is due to France not having balanced its books for 27 years, of which the UMP has responsibility.

            However, although economic policies of the UMP are weak, they are still better than the economic policies of the PS which would have been disastrous. The employment of more civil servants and reducing the state pension age – as is PS policy is suicidal.

            Additionally, senior figures in the PS campaigned against the EU constitution and would be more Euro-sceptic. I would expect Hollande to abandon the necessary recent agreement with Germany on fiscal responsibility and deficit limits.

            If the PS win the assemblé and possibly the presidentielle, France is likely to be downgraded more quickly than if the UMP wins.

    2. Except it’s not just gay marriage. PACS has never given full rights to gay people in France (it’s far backward than the UK when it comes to that) and the UMP has been relucatant to improve those rights. \What exactly does he promise gay or straight people in France. More of nothing , apart from lies and more misery!

    3. de Villiers

      Absolutely, not every decision of a gay or non-gay voter should revolve round the question of same sex couples marrying – its quite presumptive and arrogant of you to reach this conclusion from the comments of others on here.

      Sarkozy does not have a great record on either LGBT issues nor on the economy. Why would the French trust him to resolve either issue, or the pressing issues or industrial unrest, European economics, right wing extremism etc?

      1. bobbleobble 18 Apr 2012, 11:41am

        Exactly, Sarko and his party have controlled the economy over the last 10 years, perhaps de Villiers can therefore explain why the French should continue to trust them since they were in control when France fell into the chaos it currently finds itself in and they have yet to show that they can extricate France from that mess.

      2. de Villiers 18 Apr 2012, 11:44am

        I think you are being disingenuous. The comments on Sarko here are about gay marriage. It is stupid to pretend otherwise.

        Sarko does not have a good record on LGBT issues. On the economy, he is better than Royal but not as good as DSK.

        There is no real correlation between LGBT issues and other politics. France is a socially conservative country. Most people do not talk about LGBT issues. There is no such visible gay identity as in London or England. It is always French first. English people do not always understand that – or why there are no rainbow flags in la Marée in Paris.

        Even the people on the left are difficult on LGBT politics, although the leadership at least promotes them. I have never denied that the left are better on gay politics.

        1. de Villiers 18 Apr 2012, 3:59pm

          It’s rare. It’s nothing like soho or the Castro.

  19. Sarkozy certainly does know how to project a kind of quiet authority, I’ll give him that. At least during the shootings in Toulouse he was exactly the kind of guy I’d want in charge. The rest of the time, not so much. He really has all the defects of his qualities.

    Even with their Sarkozys and their Vannestes and their Boutins, I’d still choose France over Britain, though. France won’t always be a laggard on gay rights, but Britain will always be snobby.

    If I were French I’d probably hold my nose and vote for the socialists, even if they do come off as an embarrassing band of hapless sad sacks and grifters. (Kind of like the Democrats here.) Faute de mieux…

    1. Sarkozy reminds me on Tony Blair. Great presentation and good at making decisions in a crisis – but for long term policy, forget it.

    2. de Villiers 18 Apr 2012, 11:46am

      Class works differently in France. However, unlike in England, in France the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor.

    3. Robert in S. Kensington 18 Apr 2012, 12:56pm

      UK snobby? Really Chrism? I take it you’re American or Canadian? Are you naive to think there is no class system in America which has a far wider disparity between rich and poor than in than anywhere in the western EU. The republican party is notorious for snobbery and superiority and looks down on people who are less than they are. I don’t think the likes of the very wealthy such as Mitt Romney who inherited his wealth from his father would want to live in a blue collar neighbourhood let alone rub shoulders with or even socialise with them, and what’s with the 50 million with no access to health care? When did you last live in the UK or are you just watching too many costume series on t.v. such as Downton Abbey?

  20. ok family is a mother and a father, force parents to stay together for 18 years until the child is an adult then because it NEEDS a mother and father. Punish fathers who abscond and leave their wife as a single parent. Take children away from single mothers and execute them … theres too much which can be inferred from Mr Sarkozy’s statements.

  21. Sarkozy has to go! Crucial that France and Germany have Marriage Equality ASAP!

  22. Sorry you are bloody wrong! It requires a fertile man and a fertile woman to make a child. Go ahead and voice your opinions against those people, about how their relationship is not considered family within your definition of family and that you intend to stop them from having ever call it that just because of your personal beliefs.

    1. opps, forgot to link it to sterile people.

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