Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Video: Sir Richard Branson comes @Out4Marriage – ‘The law should treat everyone the same, straight or gay’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Spanner1960 18 May 2012, 10:36am

    Go for it Sir Richard.
    Nice to know some of our entrepreneurs will support us. Somehow I doubt Alan Sugar is of the same mind though.

  2. Thank You for your support, Sir Richard.

    Great to see your support for humanity, fairness and equality.

    Great to see your integrity!

    To those involved in co-ordinating @Out4Marriage, any chance you could ask Desmond Tutu (partly to counter the devious and insidious comments of Dr Sentamu, partly because Tutu speaks so strongly about LGBT issues)?

  3. Yet again we have the morally deviant using demented sophistry to try and pretend equality exists.

    Equality which is not real or true is not equality.

    If a heterosexual can marry someone they love in a committed, monogamous and consensual relationship – there is absolutely no viable and logical reason (in civil law) why a gay person should not be able to.

    Those blinded by false indoctrination or by deviant bigotry are the only ones who would disagree with this.

    They damage their own well being by their hatred.

    1. Jane Svoboda is seriously mentally ill, These trolls are no different to her. They should be recognised as kindred spirits of sad Jane and ignored.

    2. You are so obsessed with me that you see my comments everywhere – even when they are not mine!

      I’m sure in some ways thats a back handed compliment – I don’t share the view! Please desist.

      This is my second comment on this thread.

      Love is very much a part of law (I suggest you go and read the marriage act!)

      In any event, you are trying to divert attention from Sir Richards fantastic comments that demonstrate a man acting with integrity and honour.

      I again warmly and heartily congratulate Sir Richard on having the willingness to stand up for love, honour, fairness and integrity and against the banner of bigotry and sophistry that devious and deviant people who are blinded by indoctrination show.

      This thread is about the honour of equal marriage, Sir Richards candid and honest comments and has nothing to do with your vile rheotric.

      Take your medication!

      1. Paddyswurds 18 May 2012, 12:10pm

        @Stu…
        . .. … ….Au Contrair, these religious bigots think the law doesn’t apply to them. I see that once again this idiot has brought up his fav subject , incest. I have a suspicion that he is involved in an incestuous relationship of some sort and is hoping that Marriage Equality will somehow enable him to regularise his sick relationship.

        1. Robert in S. Kensington 18 May 2012, 3:55pm

          I’ve said that too. It’s quite revealing that the god squad obsess about gay sex, incest, polygamy but the rest of society doesn’t, not even gay people. Sick people for sure. It makes one wonder about those craven Tory backbenches and their absurd remarks lately, morons like Craig Whittaker and Offord.

      2. If you want to understand the marriage act – please go and read it!

        You have made your comment, it has been duly read, laughed at, responded to and forgotten.

        Again, the important factor in this story is not you – its about the candour and honesty of Richard Branson in supporting the integrity of equal marriage, fairness and equality.

        Branson is to be congratulated for repeatedly putting his head above the parapet and standing firmly for fairness and what is right.

        I think of other examples of Sir Richard standing up for what is right:
        http://www.virgin.com/richard-branson/blog/nigerias-cruel-anti-gay-law

        “People are born gay. In countries where gay people are accepted, they are amongst the most creative and dynamic people in society and countries should embrace them not prosecute them. All of us with influence in Nigeria must do what we can to stop this cruel law. I would urge educated Nigerians all over the world to do what they can to help fight this discrimination.”

      3. For those who have not twigged, Keith came and polluted this page and PN have shown the responsibility to delete the offensive and insidious messages that he posted.

        We are not talking to ourselves (even though it appears a bit disjointed now his horrible posts have (thankfully) been removed)

        Thank you PN!

        1. “plague spreading”?

          Got proof of that to justify it as factual? Surely as a God fearing individual of “morals” God wouldn’t approve of you treating one of his children in such a way unless it was a factual statement would he?

          1. Mad Jane froths again,

          2. Scripture is just a fantasty story – I would rather you kept your childrens literature to yourself thank you very much.

          3. Robert in S. Kensington 18 May 2012, 11:04pm

            Yes, starting with the creationist fairy tale. Adam & Eve, the alledged first parents of the human race who ‘begat” children. Explain how the planet became populated if it were not for incest among their children, dimwit. You need to read Genesis, Deuteronomy, plenty of heterosexual incest and polygamy to go around and not a word of condemnation from the sky fairy, you moronic degenerate twat.

        2. Which Marriage Act are you looking at?

          Clearly you are not looking in the right place.

          I am not going to do your work for you.

          Plague spreading? What are you trying to maliciously suggest?

          1. Crazy Jane ranting and raving yet again.

          2. Looney Jane Svoboda can’t stay away.

        3. Is he talking to himself?

          1. I try to ignore Keith, but he does make it very difficult to ignore, Batmanz

          2. Jane Svoboda speaks again. The crazy person is ranting with a butt plug up his arse, would that he would take it out and stick it in his mouth where it belongs.

          3. Robert in S. Kensington 18 May 2012, 11:06pm

            Stu, report it to Pink News who can close their accounts, no matter their IP address or aliases they use. They’re very sick people, sociopathic psychopaths.

        4. Robert in S. Kensington 18 May 2012, 11:12pm

          Deviant? Really? Your prior rants in regard to incest are quite revealing. Are you involved in such a relationship? I suspect you are to keep bringing it up. Why would you want to marry, do tell us? FYI, dumb arse, there is no mandate or admonition in the 1973 Matrimonial Causes Act that requires procreation as a prerequisite to marry. There is NO mention of procreation in a civil marriage ceremony. Provide us with the evidence as to why women beyond child bearing years marry?

    3. If the law said that you could only marry someone of a different religion – would that be fair?

      Using your logic it would because everyone would be treated the same.

      Its about love not uniformity.

  4. Thanks Richard Branson..

    “these people were coming out into a world that still hugely discriminated against them ….”

    I think in some Tory quarters that world still exists. Check out this Tory MPs letter to a constituent – Michael Offord

    https://www.facebook.com/nicholas.lansley/posts/10150793227836174

    After CPs I thought gay people were finally accepted but I’m beginning to think that nothing has changed. We have more rights as Branson says but the negative attitudes are still there. I’m totally disillusioned by the Tory party, after all those Tory trolls comments on PN I was beginning to believe they had changed.

  5. He has enough moral courage to raise millions for charity, to be involved in attempts to overthrown Mugabe due to his inhumanity and to support society.

    For example:
    On 18 July 2007, in Johannesburg, South Africa, Nelson Mandela announced the formation of a new group, The Elders, in a speech he delivered on the occasion of his 89th birthday. The founding members of this group are Desmond Tutu, Graça Machel, Kofi Annan, Ela Bhatt, Gro Harlem Brundtland, Jimmy Carter, Li Zhaoxing, Mary Robinson, and Muhammad Yunus. The Elders is independently funded by a group of “Founders”, including Branson and Peter Gabriel. Desmond Tutu serves as the chair of The Elders—who will use their collective skills to catalyse peaceful resolutions to long-standing conflicts, articulate new approaches to global issues that are causing or may cause immense human suffering, and share wisdom by helping to connect voices all over the world.

  6. Yet again Jane Svoboda speaks! Well rants actually. She must be ignored.

  7. This is far bigger than Jesus! This is Virgin, who actually flies people without miracles!

  8. Jane Svoboda is mentally ill. Would we respond to her? I think not.

    1. Spanner1960 18 May 2012, 10:13pm

      I think you have made your point. it’s not funny any more.
      Please stop reposting this crap, one should not mock the afflicted.

  9. Thank you Sir Richard.

  10. Great video! :) [tho please drop the background music]

  11. so you are in favor of same sex marriage if it included straights, great. now back to your pigsty

    1. Ben Foster 18 May 2012, 1:10pm

      Well, the LAW will allow straights to marry each other. There won’t be a requirement for same sex couples to prove they’re gay. If they want to marry for inheritance rights or whatever, that’s their choice.

      End of problem, surely.

  12. the stuff he flashes down the toilet has more integrity then you hehehe.

  13. I suppose the Christian brigade will boycott Virgin now!

    1. To be fair I would rather not be sat next to Dr Sentamu, David Skinner or Colin Hart on a flight!

  14. fantastic video, thanks v much richard.
    by the way i use several virgin group products on regular bases and refused on several occasions to switch to his competitor’s cheaper products (provided by murdoch)

  15. ‘The law should treat everyone the same, straight or gay’

    Actually, straight or gay are not the only options. I admit I never really thought about it until I started seeing Lumi Bast’s transphobic comments here, but the transgender community face even deeper prejudices and have far less legal protection in many respects. Equal marriage in the UK probably still won’t help them. There is a long, long way to go before EVERYONE is truly equal.

    I know this isn’t quite relevant, but I felt the need to say it.

    1. I do support equal marriage for transgender.

      I do think that establishing the law and framing it is a little more complex than for LGB people.

      I also think the battle to win equal marital rights for transgender people will be easier to achieve when same sex couples are already legally able to marry.

      That does not mean we should stop fighting for it, but should acknowledge when there will be increased strength in the campaign

      1. Ben Foster 18 May 2012, 1:12pm

        very good points, vincent.

        I agree it is more complex. It shouldn’t be a reason to shy away from getting ity done.

        I hope you’re right about the same sex legislation making it easier for transgenders to follow.

        (of course some idiot will call that the slippery slope along with incest and polygamy!!!)

        1. What was the sum this time Butt plug?
          1+1=?

        2. Robert in S. Kensington 18 May 2012, 1:27pm

          Well moron idiot, you have only to look at the old testament. Heterosexuals committing incest including the fictitious Adam & Eve with their children. You seem to obsess so much about it, could it be your desire? Normal people don’t even think about that sort of relationship. Clearly your not normal.

        3. you want marry your son or your father? i guess its the same reason as to why mother cannot marry son or daughter cannot marry father

        4. I agree its more complex, and I suspect Vincent is right that same sex marriage will smooth the way to make transgender marriage law easier.

          I agree complexity should not be an excuse to fail to ensure fairness and equality for transgender people who wish to be married.

      2. Thats great but trans people are not this extra species, actually changing the law for LBG people will include trans people as well, if we go on the gender binary level then then they will be either straight, gay or bi. What needs to happen is the people who stay together when their partner transitions and are married (that is a true testament to their commitment and marriage) will need a seamless transition from being married to well being married ;) if they choo to get a GRC, thus be legally recognised as their true gender otherwise it would not affect them.

  16. Ben Foster 18 May 2012, 1:14pm

    He has a better grasp than you, Keith, you socially inferior idiot.

  17. Ben Foster 18 May 2012, 1:15pm

    and by the way, I’d rather have a bearded liberal elite hippy in my social circle than you, Keith, any day.

    1. i bet you want to enter something else, Ben watch out

    2. Nor have I any interest in having a diseased person like you anywhere near me, or in my circle.

      *Shudders and vomits at thought*

      1. Above comment directed at the troll – not at kane !!! (Sorry kane!)

      2. Miranda no worries you posted correctly under butt plug monosyllabic expression masquerading as a thought

  18. Robert in S. Kensington 18 May 2012, 1:24pm

    Fantastic, about time a truly prominent figure is speaking out. The thing is, who else will be aware of these videos other than those who use the internet. What about those who don’t? Wouldn’t it make sense to get them aired on the t.v. channels at least to reach the entire country?

    Well done, Sir Richard, now I know why I like flying Virgin Atlantic.

  19. The key word in stu’s line is “someone”.

  20. getting drunk on cheap mouthwash again?

  21. Go back, re-read my comment. You edited it somewhat to suit your agenda – context is important and the word ‘someone’ as Batmanz states is crucial to the meaning of the entire message.

    Anyway, Sir Richard clearly has done a marvellous job of making people sit up and take notice of why equal marriage is important. Its also driven out some ignorant people to make duplicitous and false messages – which people can see and recognise the dishonesty in those statements and decide (like the majority of people in the UK) to support fairness and equality.

    I am reminded on Sir Richards strong stance against the homophobic regime of Mugabe in Zimbabwe.

    Sir Richards strong stance on issues that matter and being on the right side of history is the key and important issue on this discussion.

  22. Non sequitur. Now p!ss off

  23. Shoot, Butt plugs gone?
    Now our comments look a bit strange?(lol)

  24. The work of Clinton, Obama and the US; the work of Cameron and the UK and of gay activists to promote equality has had some success!

    BREAKING NEWS

    President Joyce Banda has said Malawi will overturn its ban on homosexual acts – the first African country to do so since 1994.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-18118350

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 18 May 2012, 3:51pm

      Great news, Stu! Thanks for posting that.

  25. God Bless this good man for coming out for gay marriage.

  26. Jesus moran 18 May 2012, 6:09pm

    Thank you Mr Branson , from now on I’ll be flying virgin , no more us carriers next time we go to England!!!’

  27. I don’t know about statute law, but the law of marriage (according to the Coalition for Marriage) is based on church marriage. Marriage vows, as couples recite them today, date back to Thomas Cranmer, the architect of English Protestantism. Cranmer laid out the purpose for marriage and scripted modern wedding vows nearly 500 years ago in his Book of Common Prayer, says the Reverend Duncan Dormor of St John’s College at the University of Cambridge.

    Although the book was revised in 1552 and 1662, “the guts of the marriage service are there in 1549,” he says. “All the things that you think of, ‘to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, to love and to cherish’, all of that stuff comes from that point.” The marriage service has had “remarkable continuity” compared with most other services, he says.

    But much of it was “pilfered from Catholic medieval rites”, such as the Sarum marriage liturgy, which was all in Latin except the actual

    1. vows. “What makes the 1549 service significant is that it is the introduction of a Protestant service in English, and it’s basically the words that we all know with a couple of small tweaks,” Dormor says.

      Roaming bards sang of love during medieval times and Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet acted it out on stage, but it wasn’t until the Victorian era that it became accepted as a foundation for marriage. “The Victorians were really, really invested in the idea of love – that marriage should actually be based on love or companionship,” says Jennifer Phegley, author of Courtship and Marriage in Victorian England. Aspiring lovebirds needed only look to Queen Victoria and Prince Albert for inspiration – the couple was upheld as the icon of the loving marriage. Their union may have been based on bloodlines, but Victoria frequently referred to it as a “love match”. “If you read her letters and her diaries, she’s very effusive about how in love with him she was, and this sort of filtered down.

      1. I don’t think any more explanation is necessary. If Keith requires one he can go look for it himself.

  28. Keith

    You say you have no problems ignoring me.

    Strange how everyone else has noticed that you seem infatuated and obsessed with me and comment on virtually everything I say (usually with lies and maliciousness)

  29. Spanner1960 18 May 2012, 10:12pm

    How about:
    “Marriage is a publicly recognised legally binding contract between two unrelated people to demonstrate their commitment to one another as a lifelong monogamous partnership.”

    I came up with that off the top of my head, and it probably has loopholes and flaws, but I think it basically encompasses what everybody wants.

    1. Why do you not agree with two committed monogamous people who love each other marrying?

      Would you prefer it was large groups or brothers and sisters?

  30. Jane Svoboda should be ignored.

  31. I love it when Branson says

    ‘Over the years, across the world, gay people have been given more and more rights. But in the UK, much of the US and many other countries, one key right is denied – the right for every couple in love to marry.

    That right so clearly must extend to gay couples

    Branson gets it.

    He wants equality

    He is on our side.

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