Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Couple ‘bullied’ after posing for anti-gay marriage petition in wedding clothes

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. The tiniest fiddle in the world plays just for them…

    Well done, idiots, you got played. One day your kids will google you and see the stand you took, your potential employers, your potential friends. You didn’t realise this? And the people who put you up as a front will be gone. Frankly, I’m laughing at them for their own bloody hubris.

    And all we see is the self-martyring cry of those who feel they should be free to bully others, snivelling because their victim got tired of the abuse, swung back and hits harder. I’m sorry, but there is no duty to tolerate the intolerant.

    1. de Villiers 25 Jun 2012, 1:18pm

      The couple have been used and are advancing an unattractive argument. However, for people to wish that they become infertile is nasty and to wish that they die from cancer is wicked.

      Sometimes the only freedom that people want is the freedom to oppress others. That applies both to the photographed couple and some of the comments here.

      1. Do we really know the couple was ‘used’, though? They’re adults after all, and almost certainly took part in this stunt willingly. (NB: by saying this I’m not condoning any personal abuse they received.)

      2. Bella Brahms 25 Jun 2012, 1:56pm

        The couple are adults and made a deliberate choice to front the vile campaign by the coalition for marriage.

        I don’t support comments advocating awful things happening to this couple, however I can totally understand the anger of the LGBTQ community and it’s inevitable that some of those poor and unhelpful comments will appear. That’s all they are though – poor comments. Let’s not let it take away our right to be angry at a couple of smug straight people who seem to get off on showing us something they are permitted to do but which we are not. How weird is that?

      3. They were driven by their opposition to gay rightts to take the stance they did. They have voiced no regrets, or expressed feeling used by C4M, for their choice to be a photo op for the christian right. They are not so naive as to think they would not be criticized by the gay community.

        But really, its the peoplle behind the campaign, Christian Concern and the rest, that are the ones that we should be directing our ire at, not a couple of pretty silly newly married twits.

        1. No, they they really are fair game for our anger – their appearance in wedding attire is deeply irritating (though as has been said before I draw the line at threats and hexes)

      4. I hope they are infertile.

        If they are so bigotred that they would deny others their civil rights then there is no doubt they would teach their spawn bigotry as well.

        Teaching children to be bigots is tantamount to child abuse.

        And therefore it would be better for them not to spawn.

  2. While the bullying words are out of order, did this couple not think that there would be a backlash against them for taking part in this PR stunt?

    Did they really think that they would not get hateful comments via Facebook or twitter and that people the world over would only give them words of ‘congratulations, great job’?

    I feel sad for them because they are so delusional!

  3. So they get married, rub our faces in it then expect everyone to be all nice. I have no sympathy.

  4. How crazy and hypocritical are the the comments of Colin Hart (of the CI and C4M) in his condemnation of the internet comments to Rhys and Esther Curnow?

    Colin Harts comments: “‘Having people going out of their way to trawl through the internet to find personal Facebook pages, just so they can send vile and hate-filled rants, is appalling. I am sure many people will be shocked this young man and young woman can be subjected to this type of spiteful and distressing attack, especially when it is conducted by people who hide behind online identities. It is completely unacceptable that a small group of mindless bullies continue to try and close down this debate by sending out threatening, racist and harassing emails.’

    Isn’t that the tactics many Christians and Christian groups engage in? Where is the racism???
    Aren’t the CI and C4M organisations which encourage vile and hate filled rants against LGBT people? Don’t these organisations and members breach the law on equality and charity

    1. management in an appalling manner? Is it not true that there is an active investigation into trolling by Christian fundamentalists on PN where vile and appalling rants have been posted? Is it not true that the Salvation Army major actually committed a crime of making death threats but there was no crime in the case of the comments which Colin Hart is so upset about? The CI and C4M are small groups (who manipulate schoolchildren for political purposes), who are mindless bullies, who try to close down debate by sending out threatening, grotesque missives and messages that are harassing and homophobic. Does Mr Hart really not see the hypocrisy?

      I do not condone any illegal actions – however, this couple put themselves in the media spotlight and the police state there has been no criminal offence committed.

      Is this not a case of the bullies complaining that they perceive they are being bullied by legitimate complaints and comments?

      Will Hart and Rhys and Esther condemn the comments of

    2. the Salvation Army at the weekend which condoned the killing of LGBT people?

      No, I thought not. Seems their priorities are skewed by their indoctrination, inhumanity and militant anti-gay views.

      1. Spanner1960 25 Jun 2012, 12:21pm

        In answer to your question, you should read the Telegraph article:

        “The abuse comes after the Archbishop of York received racist hate mail after he publicly voiced opposition to gay marriage and David Burrowes, the Tory MP, received a death threat.

        Much that I despise a lot of C4M’s tactics, I see no reason to have to sink to their level. All it does is make us look weak and as bad as them.

        1. Spanner1960

          Where do I condone harassment of this couple?

          I posed a number of questions – predominantly about the hypocrisy of the comments by Hart and partly about whether they condone the comments by the Salvation Army about putting LGBT people to death. I don’t see how the Telegraph comment addresses either.

          1. colonelkira 25 Jun 2012, 1:22pm

            Actually, the Salvation Army made no such comments. So your question is redundant.

          2. colenelkira

            Your comment is redundant, rather than mine.

            In an interview on Joy FM in Australia, Major Andrew Craibe was challenged on parts of the Salvation Army’s ‘Salvationist Handbook of Doctrine’ which cite a Biblical passage which many perceive as declaring that homosexuals are deserving of death, Craibe refused to distance himself from the passage or the interpretation as he said they were what his religion believed.

            Here is a transcript of part of the interview:

            RYAN: . . . that says, according to the Salvation Army, that [they] deserve death. How do you respond to that, as part of your doctrine?

            CRAIBE: Well, that’s a part of our belief system.

            RYAN (cutting in): So we should die.

            CRAIBE: You know, we have an alignment to the Scriptures, but that’s our belief.

            RYAN: Wow. So we should die.

            Craibe did not deny the view that all gay people should die or deserve to be put to death.

            I suspect Colin Hart would not condemn that view either – or this “lovely” newly married

          3. couple who engaged in boasting about their new marriage and their desire to prevent other couples who believe in love, fidelty, commitment and monogamy from being able to do so – because of how they were born – and clearly relished rubbing the noses of those who they seek to prevent having the same civil rights, in it.

            They are no better than the Queensland politician who spoke in his parliament last week to seek to deny LGBT equality and during the speech rubbed salt int eh wound of LGBT people by wishing his wife a happy anniversary.

            Such is callous nature of indoctrinated fundamentalists – their unChristian attitude is evident by their actions, words and deeds.

          4. Spanner1960 25 Jun 2012, 6:06pm

            Stu: “Isn’t that the tactics many Christians and Christian groups engage in? Where is the racism???”

            I merely answered your question.
            I was not trying to state that you were in any way responsible for this behaviour, I was simply offering my personal opinion about some of the pro-gay marriage response towards certain people.

          5. colonelkira 25 Jun 2012, 7:19pm

            Apparently you lack the ability to even read your own post, including the transcript you just posted.

            The Salvation Army condoned nothing of the sort. Major Andrew Craibe, a MEMBER of the salvos made the statement, of which the salvos has since decried and apologised for.

            If you refuse to submit EVIDENCE to support your claims then you are as misguided and full of hate as the people who make such comments.

            Shame on you.

          6. colonelkira 25 Jun 2012, 7:22pm

            PS….John Murphy is not a Queensland politician……..you must learn to temper your emotions with fact…….not fiction or mistakes.

          7. colonelkira

            If you really believe that the Salvation Army did not say gay people should die and refuse to repudiate an impression that LGBT people should be put to death – then it is you who need to learn about evidence. The interview transcript and recording is easily available on the internet. Yeah sure there has been a PR stunt to apologise, but weak words are meaningless unless accompanied by action. The SA action has been repeatedly and virulently homophobic.

        2. Sorry Spanner1960

          I asked so many questions – I presumed you were referring to the other ones!

  5. Part of me wants to feel sorry for them, if only for being such idle sheep allowing themselves to be prostituted to this hateful cause without so much as a hint of foresight.

    I too looked them up on Facebook and found a link to their professionally produced wedding video. Of the comments added as a result of their exposure in the press, there wasn’t hate or aggression (when quite broadly I can see why there would be) – it was heartbreakingly simple.

    (I’m paraphrasing slightly)

    “Congratulations on your special day. It looks like a beautiful setting/ceremony and I hope you have many happy years together. It’s just a shame you felt the need to deny that to others who are committed and in love”.

    Whilst I don’t doubt for a second there was a lot of vitriol spewed from some rightly angry folk, trying to turn the tables back on us *again* is just lazy journalism. The “bullies crying because the victim got fed up and swung back harder” is an old but very sound take on this.

  6. Techiechick 25 Jun 2012, 11:44am

    Newly-weds? who is to say that their marriage will last anyway?

    1. Spanner1960 25 Jun 2012, 12:23pm

      Is that necessary?
      I have no problem with this couple getting married.
      I just want same-sex couples to have the same opportunity.

      1. I would concur that all couples who love each other, consent and have no legitimate legal impediment should be able to marry and celebrate their marriage.

        I would also suggest those that put themselves in the public spotlight should anticipate robust criticism where appropriate.

    2. Seeing as 50% of straight marriages end in divorce then there is a 50/50 chance tthey will divorce.

      They have made their marriage public property by becoming the face of homophobic hatred.

      Speculation on their marriage is entirely justifiable – they have invited us to do so through their moronic actions.

      I predict a divorce within 5 years.

      1. Spanner1960 25 Jun 2012, 6:12pm

        Go chew some dandelions.
        They still won’t be as bitter or twisted as you.

        1. I’m neither bitter nor twisted.

          I am simply engaging in some idle speculation about when this couple will divorce.

          And they have invited me to do so through their own actions.

          I reckon 5 years tops.

  7. It is very sad indeed that members of our community should not be able to remained civilised and end up behaving in exactly the same way as those they are complaining about. This is only giving musre amunition to our ennemies.

    As a result, I am sure that people behind the C4M campaign must be very happy with the results.

    In addition to being petty and spiteful, the couple in question is also clearly very naive to have let themselves be used like that.

    1. Absolutely the manipulation of a newly married couple is disgusting – but then one of the allies of the C4M, the Catholic Education Service, grotesquely politically manipulated schoolchildren.

      The C4M is discredited.

      1. They are NOT being manipulated.
        They are adults who readily agreed to become the face of homophobic hatred.
        They must live with the consequences of their own decisions.

        1. I suspect it is far more likely that they are being (at least in part) manipulated.

          They made the choice to do this and must therefore take some responsibility for their decisions – but that does not mean they were not manipulated.

          Their decisions face consequences – and that includes an understandably robust response from LGBT people.

          We do have to take care to maintain the upper hand and demonstrate that we are the moral parties in this.

    2. Wrong.

      By becoming the face of homophobic hatred, they have openly invited people to comment on and speculate about their own marriage.

      We are merely commenting on the likelihood of this couple getting divorced or being infertile.

      They are actively campaigning to deny us our civil rights.

      They have made their marriage public property.

      1. Spanner1960 25 Jun 2012, 6:08pm

        You are just filth.
        You are the type of person that brings the LGBT ‘community’ into disrepute.

        it would not surprise me in the slightest if it turned out you had written this yourself.

        1. I’m not filth.

          You agree (I hope0 that turning up in marriage drag at 10 Downin Street campaigning for the denial of our civl rights that they have made their marriage public property.

          By declaring themselves the symbol; of straight marriage, it is only right and proper that we comment on their marriage.

          They could have stayed silent in which case we would have no reason or justification to speculate on when they will get divorced.

  8. I just don’t understand why they thought it was a good idea to begin their happy life together by associating with such a cruel and negative campaign. They’re clearly idiots, and unkind, and selfish as well. I’m not a vengeful person, not by any means, and I sincerely hope they see how stupid they’ve been and apologise and distance themselves from it all, but right now I’m rather afraid they deserve all the opprobrium they’re getting.

    1. They thought it was a good idea because they are professional provocateurs. Not only did they intend to provoke intemperate responses, but they probably posted the responses themselves. Christians routinely lie. They think they have a special dispensation to slander other people. It is part of what they define as freedom of religion.

  9. I sent them both a few comments. However, it was not a hate filled rant. I felt, and still do, if you put yourself in the public arena with a controversial opinion, then you must accept those who have the opposite view. While I don’t endorse name calling and bullying (look at the negative publicity it’s brought the church for using such tactics) I felt that I could be part of a different petition. I said I disagreed, they were shameful for doing it, that they would regret it in the future and I hoped for their children’s sake that none of them turned out to be gay.

    On a slightly different note, I am getting tired of religious communities calling ‘bullying, discrimination and that their free speech is being curbed’ every time they’re criticised for maliciously attacking the LGBT community. If they’re allowed free speech to condemn us, then free speech allows us to condemn them in return.

    1. There certainly does seem to be double standards – those anti-gay militant religious campaigners seek freedom of speech to be able to impart their views, but seek to deny the freedom of speech of those who wish to demonstrate that the content of their message is wrong and inhumane.

      In short, they want to be free to say whatever they want, they do not want to be held accountable for their views and they seek to deny freedom of speech to those who wish to hold them to account or who vehemently disagree with their views. Fortunately, freedom of speech (with responsibility) doesnt work that way – and accountability and freedom for opposing views to be heard exists.

      Their malicious and maleavolent campaign is obvious and it will be exposed.

      Given that Northumbria Police have found no crime in the complaint made by the Curnows – I suspect it was encouragement from C4M and CI to significantly exaggerate the issue and seek a publicity opportunity – further manipulating the Curnows.

  10. They overwrote whatever positive symbolism their wedding had when they let it be turned into this publicity stunt. That’s on their own heads – ironically they’ve cheapened their own marriage through their protest at ours. I have no sympathy for them at all.

    The delivery of the petition was not a simple expression of a political view, it was a calculated expression of spite and smugness in the midst of a debate where tensions were already very high. Without wishing to condone any abuse they’ve received, it was certainly to be expected.

  11. Not only do I suspect they predicted this, I suspect they engineered it. This was a stunt designed to provoke a reaction and it succeeded, enabling the Christian bigots to let out their familiar wail that people are treating them badly and they are being bullied/persecuted/oppressed. It’s a shame that some people had to rise to the bait, but I feel no sympathy for this couple – quite the opposite since I expect they are beside themselves with glee having elicited exactly the response they had hoped for. Yet again we see the staggering hypocrisy of Christians claiming that being told people wish they would “rot in hell” is bullying, when that is pretty much non-stop message from their religion when it comes to gay people. The very way they chose to deliver the petition displays not just their bigotry but also their obvious sense of superiority. We can take comfort in knowing that they have lost. If it takes 50 or 150 years or more, eventually both their bigotry and their religion will b

  12. What sad feeble couple.

    They dress up in their wedding clothes in an effort to deny other human beings their human rights.

    Quite a sickening spectacle.

    1. It really is a nasty, cynical, spiteful thing to do. Not far from the WBC tactic of picketing funerals of soldiers and people who die in homophobic attacks. Just really, really nasty and reveals them for who they are.

  13. Oh poor them.

    Welcome to the real world. I have zero sympathy. You made your bed, now sleep in it.

    That said, threats are uncalled for. disparaging remarks, insults and calling them out on how incredibly narrow minded and stupid they are, is called for.

  14. if they went to downing street and said muslims should not be allowed to marry, I would be intersted to know what kind of reception they would have received!!

    1. You can imagine the result of that, Muslims would be burning copies of photo’s of the couple that they can find on the internet, burning effergies of them and there would probably be a fatwah issued on them!

      1. Ah yes, but that wouldn’t be hate filled abuse, it would be freedom of religious expression.

  15. If you poke a dragon, don’t complain when it flames you.

  16. I’m sorry, should I cry now?

  17. I can’t find any categorical proof of this, but I have just had a chat with a friend who tells me that Rhys Curnow is a researcher for the Christian Institute.

    Now, many of the media reports refer to Rhys Curnow as a charity researcher originally from Wales. Other media reports states that the Curnows are from Newcastle. The headquarters of the Christian Institute are in Newcastle. There are very few charity organisations with significant bases (beyond simple regional offices) in Newcastle. So it is feasible, but I would be interested if anyone (including PN) could establish with more accuracy?

      1. Indeed he is not.

        Nor can I find him on the CI website.

        However, I did find a job vacancy in the CI office for a researcher dated Nov 2011 which he may have obtained.

        Its an interesting rumour – but whether its more than that I have no idea.

        1. If he did obtain that job…

          … I wonder if marriage photography was part of the job description.

          Or as we might say about Humpty Dumpty…

          Did he fall or was he pushed…?

  18. Very unpleasant people, but they were bound to make the most of negatives comments that were directed at them. Those who oppose equality have form for this sort of thing.

  19. I wonder if it is has dawned on them that their own marriage will forever be linked to what I hope they one day realise was a nasty, mean-spirited stunt, dumping 50 boxes of hate-filled bigotry on the right of gay people to marry who they choose. Let’s not shed any tears over this pair.

    1. Exactly, Adam

      When equal marriage happens – there will be forever in the British press comments that couples such as the Curnows sought to prevent others having what they were entitled to.

      Is that how they want to celebrate their marriage?

      1. What a legacy for their children. Mummy and daddy were high profile bigots back in 2012.

        1. Hopefully they are infertile.

          THey would teach their offspring their own bigotry. Which would make them child abusers.

          Child abusers should not reproduce.

      2. Of course, Stu. I might have said on these pages before that equal marriage will be a game changer – a game changer because our love for our soulmates will be normalised (for want of a better word) in the eyes of the rest of society. You know next what will happen, I bet! We will become truly equal and no longer will hateful homophobia will be accepted in the way that overt racism is not accepted today. This implies that organised religion will lose its power to divide and say what it wants. Oh, the Christian establishment is frightened alright because they know what equal marriage implies and what the consequences will be for their own power and standing.

        This has never been about morality – not really. It’s only been about power and the protection of vested interests that have grown since the reformation. And, as far as I’m concerned change can’t come soon enough.

        1. Absolutely. It is coming and how the schadenfreude will taste good.

  20. Robert in S. Kensington 25 Jun 2012, 12:25pm

    Amazing, they can’t take the heat when we hit back at them. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. C4M and CI are hate grous and should be officially declared as such. Their mean-spirited rants over the years and past few months incite bullying by their constant villification and denigration of gay people.

    Now when we push back, they don’t like it and play the victim card every time. Well, too frigging bad, they’ll have to get used to it. More of the same is on its way as long as they continue to dehumanise us in the name of christian beliefs. Bloody hypocrites.

  21. It was a vulgar stunt to speak out against marriage equality dressed in wedding attire. I see no reason to do so other than to provoke anger, as their petition is no more likely to be taken seriously just because they were dressed up. If the couple expected no ‘backlash’ they were naïve at the very least.

    I believe the desired effect was to receive ‘bullying’ messages so they could whine to the press about free speech. Much better to say nothing to them and reduce their 15 minutes of fame to a mere 30 seconds.

    1. I agree. I think they got – or if not they, then the organisers got – exactly what they wanted. An opportunity to play the victim card in typically cynical fashion.

  22. A totally naive couple who used their marriage to make a political statement and now find that getting involved in politics means lowering yourself into the bear-pit. Foolish, and there really is no point in complaining about it now!

    Despite their obviously odious position towards matters of love, I still feel depressed at some of the comments aimed at them. We must allow the better angels of our nature to lead us during this fight and not lower ourselves to the level of the homophobes and haters out there.

    Let’s not troll the afflicted.

    1. Interested to know why you say ‘naive’. I can find no evidence to suggest this – save that they will have this around their necks for the rest of their lives.

  23. Sister Mary Clarence 25 Jun 2012, 12:34pm

    Mr Curnow told the Telegraph: “All we did was hand in a petition at Downing Street. Surely there’s room for people to disagree without resorting this kind of hatred and abuse.”

    And the morons didn’t feel that doing so in their wedding gear would be slightly inflammatory?

    Did they have a lobotomy while they were at the church getting married …. or did that happen before?

    The real frightening thing is these two halfwits, as well as legally being allowed to marry, and are also legally allowed to rear children.

    I mean how can that be right?

    Not two brain cells to rub together between them and they are allowed to procreate. It can’t be right, surely it can’t.

  24. They put themselves in the public light as individuals, dressed in a deliberately provocative attire which says “haha we can do this and you can’t!”, they should be prepared for people to insult them as individuals because at the end of the day they were there as individuals. Their very petition is insulting to many lgbt people.

    1. Exactly.

  25. I feel sorry for them.

    I feel sorry for them exactly the amount they feel sorry for not wanting LGBT people to be able to get married.

  26. Let that be a lesson. Whilst it is unfortunate that they did get bullied: if you decide to bully others, then don’t be surprised of you get the same in return.

    1. If you can’t take it, don’t dish it out, in other words.

  27. That There Other David 25 Jun 2012, 12:42pm

    They knew from the start that this is the reaction they’d get. However, now can tell everyone just what martyrs to the cause they are, which of course appeals to the Christians out there because they’re all conditioned to sympathise. A nice way to rile up the support base, don’t you think?

    This is just PR manipulation. Transparent PR manipulation at that. Don’t fall for it, don’t get distracted, and don’t let it divide us.

  28. I won’t be shedding any tears for them.
    If you live by the sword…

  29. I hate seeing stories like this. Of course they deserve some kind of backlash for their stupid unimpressive stunt, but this is too far and it’s ridiculous. Wishing cancer or infertility on someone is downright vicious and while I do think the pair are idiots, they don’t deserve the hatred they are receiving.
    And it does absolutely NOTHING for our cause.

    1. Wishing cancer on them is clearly wrong.

      Wishing infertility on them is perfectly fine though.

      Infertilityg is not an illness and thanks to their bigotry they would teach their children the same bigotry;

      That is tantamount to child abuse.,

      Wishing infetility on child abusers is perfectly acceptable.

      1. A broken pelvis is not an illness either but it is a clinical event I wouldnt wish that on anyone

  30. Please don’t be taken in. This is more about the continuing PR strategy to demonise the LGBT community on this issue. In my view it is a tactic to merely garner sympathy and the couple involved not only were aware of the back lash but in fact it was relied upon.

    Those who have attacked this couple in an aggressive and uncivil manner may have done the overall cause a dis-service.

    It is important to always argue on the issue and not decend into abuse. As it is clear the central arguement of fairness and equality is the where the anti LGBT marriage is extremely weak.

  31. Wow now they are playing the victim card and saying they were bullied. They are the bullies who are supporting a hate group.

    If some people went to far that is wrong but as the police said no crime commuted here.

    They are the same kinds of folk who pollute PN with hate comments and spout of to the media with hate comments so I can’t feel sorry for them.

  32. For Heaven’s sake, what did they expect?

    I’m sure some of the comments were unpleasant, but I can’t say I have much sympathy for them.

  33. Their stunt was one of the most vicious attacks on us hiding wait did behind benign smiles. I am sad to read some of the backlash comments and I think we must temper our reaction up to a point. But their vile actions made me very angry and I can’t deny having had dark thoughts myself.

    1. …hiding as it did behind benign….
      Sorry for typo

  34. Ah, the old “I’ve received death threats” line. In this age of easy anonymous communication, is there anyone who has expressed any opinion in public and failed to receive angry, hate-filled responses? I mean, look at youtube.

    To all those here who are criticising the people who sent these messages: given the track record of groups like the Christian Institute and c4m, can we really trust that they are real? They could easily have written the “we’re being persecuted” press releases long before this stunt actually took place.

  35. The biters, bit!

  36. why, if you just newly married as this couple are, should your mind be focused on other people getting married?

    marriage is between 2 people, why should they get involved in other peoples, its none of their business.

  37. They added insult to injury with their wedding-related stunt. if someone broke the law then they should be punished but they get exactly no sympathy from me. and i hope their childish and disgusting stunt follows them for the rest of their lives.

  38. I really hope this couple doesn’t have children because their kids will be born into a world where discrimination against minorities is seen as disgusting and will not be tolerated.

  39. Jock S. Trap 25 Jun 2012, 3:04pm

    Mmmm funny isn’t it, they suddenly get a taster of what we have to go through, some on a daily basis for being Gay, Lesbian etc because of their chosen religion and look how sorry we’re supposed to feel for them.

    What a shame the Daily Telegraph felt the need highlight so called bullying via PinkNews yet not their own towards Marriage Equality via religion.

    Double standards or what?

    Damn hypocrites the lot of ‘em!!

  40. Christians love to pretend that they are martyrs. They don’t actually want to be martyred, mind you, else they would not be crying their crocodile tears. But they sure like striking poses of martyrdom, especially if they can blame it on the very people they are trying to marginalize.

  41. To paraphrase a line from that great series ‘Frasier”:

    At Cornell University they have an incredible piece of scientific equipment known as the Tunneling Electron Microscope.

    Now, this microscope is so powerful that by firing electrons you can actually see images of the atom, the infinitesimally minute building blocks of our universe.

    If I were using that microscope right now, I still wouldn’t be able to locate my interest in their problem.

  42. Sorry, but wishing them infirtility is not bullying, because it makes no threats. Wishing someone to become infirtile may be uncivil, but so is asking politicians to deny people equal civil rights. I see an equivalency to the acts. Besides, who would want this disgusting couple to spawn? They are the perfect storm for the next Hitler.

  43. It was probably Will or Jock or some other Sh!t-head who bullied them.

    But then again, I think they deserve it.

    The offence that this couple has created for themselves is as offensive as some of the childish vitriol on this message board. So I guess both sides deserve each other.

    *Sigh*

    When will this human race ever grow up from their childish playground antics.

    1. Childish?

      probably Will or Jock or some other Sh!t-head

      People who live in glass houses should refrain from hurling bloody great boulders around, don’t you think?

  44. Such a happy looking couple, I wish them all the best.
    I also wish that they would have had the foresight to see what such a hateful statement they were making when they did that PR stunt.

    They dont deserve the cancer/infertile remarks etc, but they should have realised that people would not sit idly by and let them get away with this.

  45. Bullying is wrong, people.

    1. Indeed

      This couple was not bullied though.

      They persopnally invited people into their marriage and made their marriage public property by getting involved in this homophobic campaign

  46. The Christian Institute is campaigning against section 5 of the Public Order Act… to guarantee their freedoms of speech, including the right to malign homosexuals in public.In particular they fought to protect the right of a street preacher to quote homophobic passages in the public.
    And they should have that right, but at the same time they shouldn’t whinge and complain when we wish to exercise our rights to freedom of speech – offensive or otherwise.

  47. Well, though I do not really feel any sympathy for them, as I back then did conclude the guy must be an active member of C4M, I do wish them a long and happy marriage….
    However, though they clearly were soliciting negative comments on their absolutely appaling and hateful stunt, I am absolutely disgusted by the hateful messages they were sent..

    Please, all of us that fit under the LGBTQI umbrella can we stay polite, and not lower ourselves to the level of the anti-LGBTQI haters like these people?

    1. BTW, I know we will not be able to prevent the trolls to jump on the band wagon harrassing these people, and also obviously not from these hate groups sending hatemail to themselves to create more negative publicity to our cause of equality and equal rights..

  48. I remember watching a debate between a Christian apologist, Richard Swinburne, and a secularist on the problem of evil. When Swinburne attempted to justify the Holocaust in terms of God’s grace, his opponent called out “for shame”, and told him to “go rot in hell”. I don’t think this was a disproportionate response or an error of judgment. It was an entirely appropriate expression of disgust at Swinburne’s objectionable argument.
    Sometimes you just have to call something out in a manner fitting the provocation.
    Ditto C4M photo op stars.

    1. Well said. The existence of evil is the reason I beleive there is no god. Or at least one of them. What does god want from mankind? Why did he bring them into creation only yo then allow the Holocaust? Jewish philosphers better than I have contemplated this and they and christians come up with the same answer as Job. Better just trust in god. No answer in other words. There is no answer to evil. It exists. Along with good. What kind of capricious and arbitrary god creates humankind and then gives them freewill and allows the Holocaust and childhood cancers? All in the name of what? An experiment? To come to know him in heaven? We wouldn’t treat rats thus. The only comparison I can think of is the guy who tortures kttiens as a child and then goes on to be a serial killer.

  49. Mr Curnow – “We’re at a loss to understand how people could be so vicious.”

    Right back at you both!

  50. Threats of murder or violence, or incitements to them, are unacceptable and must be dealt with severely by the law.
    But if you express a contentious view in public, expect flack. If you voice or visually present offensive and denigrating attitudes in public, expect a great deal of flack. It’s sort of how a free and open society works. I am increasingly suspicious that that is precisely what some religious ideologues don’t like.

  51. I wonder how much they got paid.

    1. 30 pieces of silver – 30 denarii.

      …which was good enough for Judas!

  52. Their marriage will end in divorce.

    Their marrage is public property seeing as they whored their wedding out like the prostitutes they are, to deny LGBT people their civil rights.

  53. Kornelijus Norvidas 25 Jun 2012, 6:13pm

    Controversial activity, controversial reactions. Something wrong? Welcome to marriage a la Windsor: you, I and The Telegraph.

  54. Aaaah, the poor things….bullied???? Have they considered for a moment how we’ve been/are tortured and slaughtered throughout human history?! Fiddlesticks – if they want to be poster kids for hatred – let them be offended when we crticise them for their bigotry. Pamapered fools!!

  55. There is a better picture of them here. They look a bit like the brother and sister in the League of Gentlemen don’t you think.

    telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9349353/Gay-marriage-newlywed-couple-bombarded-with-internet-hate-mail.html

    1. They creep me out, the fact that they are the same age as me as well makes me worry as I’ve never had anyone of my age have such bigoted views its sad that such backwards views.

    2. In the telepgraph photo:

      He looks like he is gritting his teeth

      Her smile looks totally false…

      …and as others have mentioned, they are now faced with the total ignomy of forever being associated with this picture and their bigoted ideals.

      The relevant saying?

      Marry in haste, repent at leisure!

  56. Given that Mrs Curnow is a primary school teacher, I do hope that her school is ensuring that she is sticking to Section 407 of the Education Act. I would wager that she fails to present balanced argument to her pupils when discussing families and relationships.

  57. Don Harrison 25 Jun 2012, 7:12pm

    Maybe being bullied was all part of their rant. Have they paid for the builling to occur?

  58. “Bullying” my @rse.

  59. Re-creating the look of your own wedding for political purposes is on teh same level and perhsp worse than the stunt with the wedding sponsered by Wispa by what’s-her-face a few years back. A stunt from which she never recovered reputationally speaking.

    likewise Mr and Mrs Newlywed. A bastardisation of their own ceremony in front of the cameras.

    How very short sighted of them. For ever after known as ‘the Petition Wedding’.

  60. “By all means let’s have a debate – especially as the public haven’t had the chance to vote on this issue.”

    Yet you’re there, handing a petition to prevent such a vote. You are morons.

  61. Good!! They chose to be the face(s) of a hate campaign. It is right that they hear directly from the community how hurtful their actions are. Maybe now they’ll realise that their stunt affects real people – not some dreamed up “bad gays” though I doubt they will. I’m disappointed they only got a hundred disgruntled messages. That’s 0.01% of the messages they personally delivered on behalf of the people who hate us.

  62. Vicious comments are counter-productive aswell as unnecessary. Far better to write something pithy but polite.

    However, who on earth decides to do something like this? I’ve had friends who’ve made donations to charity after getting married, and friends who’ve ‘done good’ for other people in similar ways, but I can’t even BEGIN to understand the mentality of a newly-married couple who just can’t wait to try to deprive other loving adults of the happiness they have. That comes across as pure spite – like sticking your tongue out at people at the back of the bus while you crow about how great YOU are and how lovely it is to be sitting at the front of the bus. Undignified and very sad.

    I also think they were waiting for any criticism from LGBT people so they could claim the victim status so beloved by so many fundie ‘christians’.

    Whatever their motivation, they should be ashamed. Of all the things they could do to celebrate their wedding, they chose a vindictive, mean-spirited act.

  63. Interesting… I wish they weren’t just crying crocodile tears. Their action makes me and others like me cry, fear, worry, stress and even get depressed about what our future hold if we are denied to share our love with the one we love in a legally recognized committed relationship. Their action makes us cry and weep, denies us rights, denies our partners rights, and belittles us from being the same equal even after we have done all and been equally, if not more supportive to our partners; but their action says they get treated better by a society and system we should own equally. As I began, I wish and hope they get to cry for real. I wish they experience a heart-rending event such as they one they wish us so they can cry blood for tears.

    They need to encounter the very evil they invented so to understand how it feels.

    Arrant fools.

    Just in case PinkNews will removes my comment, I will put on my blog and ready to be questioned for it.

    1. They’ll be crying when in 5 years the headline reads ‘The symbol of straight marriage and homophobic hatred filed for divorce today’.

      They will cry even harder if they spawn when in 18 years time they are disowned by their children for their moronic bigotry

  64. Besides the fact that one should think about these things before NO ONE should get bullied and I can only urge the people who did so to stop now.

    We need to have the moral high grounds and should not start pety and pathetic and stupid as well as useless threats and comments and bullying that will only make the LGBT community look bad

    1. But this couple has NOT been bullied.

      They turned up in full marriage drag to deliver a discredited petition to deny a segment of the population its equal civil rights.

      In doing so they openly invited people to comment on their marriage, their motives, their fertility and their likelihood of divorce by behaving in such a manner.

      If they are going to prostitute themselves as the face of straight marriage, then their own marriage is fair game for comment and ridicule.

      I predict they will be divorced within 5 years.

  65. David in Houston 26 Jun 2012, 2:52am

    So their damage is that someone said they should rot in hell? Words hurt for a few minutes. Discrimination lasts a lifetime. These people are clueless, and lack even the smallest amount of empathy for the people they want to disenfranchise. I have nothing but contempt for them.

  66. Well, if you side with a pack of fascists, you can’t expect to be popular, can you?

  67. As much as I disagree with this pair of religious morons, I do not condone any intimidating, threatening or bullying behaviour towards them. This is a free country with free speech and nobody should be threatened for freedom speech. I do however disagree with their stupid campaign to take away our rights.

  68. “Without resorting to hatred and abuse”? Guess they never think what it’s like to be LGBT.

  69. In the photo they look like a bland pair of plastic Ken and Barbie dolls atop some cheezy wedding cake – makes me glad I’m single. lol.

  70. As a committed Christian I have not signed the C4M petition despite it being repeatedly sent to me. Please understand that there are many Christians who stand by you and your rights.

    Clearly “bullying” from either side is unacceptable

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