Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Republican invokes memory of gay dead brother to blast equal marriage

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Garry Cassell 5 Nov 2012, 8:53pm

    Stupid man, God had nothing to do with marriage arrangements…time to grow up…come out of the dark ages..

    1. With his 1970’s clone style moustache and pink shirt he looks more than just a wee bit gay himself.
      It’s so heartening to hear that he knows many gay couples and how he loves them so much he opposes their full civil equality.

    2. billywingartenson 8 Nov 2012, 12:17am

      REligion turns people into hate full and stupid.

      I really wish Jesus would send his brother back – and cut this bigot piece of poo up for spare parts for other sick people.

      He’s a waste of human flesh and my dog is hungry and would be glad to eat the leftovers.

      We know we are on the way to acceptance and equality when the religious nutters have to go this down low.

  2. The ignorant snivelling of religion-addled morons invoking their pathetic desert djinn just makes America a laughing stock.

  3. That Matt 5 Nov 2012, 8:55pm

    Disgusting, bigoted liar. His brother would be turning in his grave. It’s a good thing that there probably isn’t an afterlife because he’d be heartbroken to hear such filth, I suspect!

  4. “It has taken me a while, but I have finally figured out that God’s plan is better than man’s plan in all aspects of life”

    You’ll be campaigning to re-introduce slavery then, and making sure that all non-virgin brides are stoned to death on their fathers’ doorsteps, I presume? And don’t forget to insist that all science books be changed to show the biblical ‘truth’ of the sun revolving around the Earth.

    How sad that this man lets dogma override his love for his brother.

    1. Sister Mary Clarence 6 Nov 2012, 10:35am

      “You’ll be campaigning to re-introduce slavery then, and making sure that all non-virgin brides are stoned to death on their fathers’ doorsteps, I presume?”

      As will we all I’m sure, and God forbid I catch sight of anyone with crab sticks in their basket at next time I’m in Waitrose, for Lucifer will doubtless reach up from the reeking sulphur stoked fires of the nether world, and drag them down to an eternity of damnation in the scalding hot cauldrons of Hell.

      1. yuk yuk :P

    2. Henry Katziff 8 Nov 2012, 5:02pm

      WellCUM to religion. Virtually every religion at one time or another has been murderous and a curse on humanity

      But nothing changes in the catholic church – often described as the largest and longest lived criminal conspiracy.

      Where did Goebbels get the idea of “If you tell lies often enough and outrageous enough they will be seen as the truth?

      From the basis of the church – the divinity and coming back to life of a all his life Jewish Rabbi

      BTW Osirus was the son of the sUn god, and father of the god Horus

      Alexander the great was a son of God – pulled out of zeus Forhead (Zeus was I think the God of War

      Alex the gr was also the greatest warrior of his time, capturinga and raping all of asia minor

      Inother words the worst murderer of his time along with ghengis kahn

      1. Harlequin 8 Nov 2012, 7:37pm

        Alexander was also homosexual.

  5. Robert Brown 5 Nov 2012, 9:06pm

    Why doesn’t he also dig up his brother’s grave and jump on it . . .

    http://www.rainbow-citizen.com

  6. Kerry Hollowell 5 Nov 2012, 9:08pm

    evil scum bag

  7. I know most commentors would want to show their disproval or anger towards such a man.

    I can’t help but feel sadness and empathy for his brother’s partner. What a way to have used the deceased’s name. :(

  8. An Cat Dubh 5 Nov 2012, 9:27pm

    Twat. ‘God intended for marriage to consist of one man and one woman’, unless of course you’re Abraham, Jacob, Elkana, King David, or King Solomon.
    >_>

    1. Amazing isn’t it how these religious types are selective about what parts of the bible they feel is relevant!

    2. Guglielmo Marinaro 5 Nov 2012, 10:16pm

      Not to mention Lamech, Esau, Gideon, Rehoboam, Elkanah, Ashur, Abijah and Jehoiada.

    3. Henry Katziff 8 Nov 2012, 4:57pm

      or a sex starve preist for whom the kiddies virgin butt hole looks like its a womans vagina.

  9. I wondered how many sentences in that God would be mentioned

  10. I am sure that his brother would be so proud of him………………….(please note the sarcasm_

  11. God didn’t create marriage – Adam and Eve wern’t married before having kids there was nobody to conduct the ceremony!

  12. He claims to “love” not just his brother, but his brother’s same-sex partner of 25 years.
    And out of such abundant love, he is going to tell his brother’s partner to sit on his middle digit and swivel, and that because the Sky Daddy agenda places a higher value on the 55 hour short marriage of Britney Spears and Jason Alexander. He cannot gain any reward or recognition for 25 long years of union.

  13. “kids do much better when raised by their married mother and father”, he said.

    He says so, so it is therefore right.

    The ARROGANCE of them. It’s unbelievable and MADDENING.

    1. Harlequin 6 Nov 2012, 3:41am

      But it’s true! Someone not raised by his father could never rise to become President of the Uni…

      Oops, my mistake!

  14. Just another idiot. Too many of them around. If there is an after life I’ m not interested in sharing it with the like of them anyway

  15. Political mileage from the morgue

    1. billywingartenson 8 Nov 2012, 12:19am

      no its a product of the sewer

  16. This reminds me. I read the other day that the “Flat Earth Society” is still a going concern, small but still active. I thought it had folded in the fifties. Progress moves at a snails pace.

    1. billywingartenson 8 Nov 2012, 12:21am

      the real issue is that a fool and his money are soon parted. These freaks probably run this biz to scam people and give money to the Vatican molesters and the xtian slaver re-wannabees

  17. A poisoned and poisonous man.

  18. “I miss my brother and stay in contact with his partner”

    for now

    1. billywingartenson 8 Nov 2012, 12:22am

      Maybe he dint want to do incest with the brother but its oke to have sex with the brothers partner

  19. I love you and have so much empathy for you and that’s why I want to tastelessly invoke your dead partner and take away your rights. I have so much love in me, I love you like I would love any murderer or rapist. It’s not you I hate. Just everything you do.

  20. Incredible. One more reason to ‘pray’ that Obama gets in again for another four years. He may have fallen short of his initial promise, but he’s not a raging homophobe like the republicans.

  21. Wow, that’s surprisingly cold.

  22. Harlequin 6 Nov 2012, 3:57am

    The story’s lead appears to falsely sensationalise the story: according to the body, he is disagreeing with equal marriage; not homosexuality. However misguided his reasoning, that position is not necessarily a reproachful one, let alone one of “hatred”. I, personally, don’t care greatly about the issue and I know plenty of other homosexual people who don’t like the idea at all. It might even be that his brother and his partner weren’t passionate about the matter.

    1. Colin *M* 6 Nov 2012, 7:47am

      I know many heterosexual people that don’t like the idea of marriage (gay or straight) either, but they wouldn’t campaign for their friends and family to be denied the opportunity.

      1. Harlequin 6 Nov 2012, 9:34am

        I do not mean to suggest that he is right; only that it might be wrong to attribute his actions to hatred.

        1. Why otherwise would he bother to get involved? It doesn’t affect him directly at all. He is making the effort because he’s a bigot who, despite losing a gay brother, is filled with malice.

          1. Harlequin 8 Nov 2012, 8:16pm

            Why do you assume malice?

    2. Sister Mary Clarence 6 Nov 2012, 10:53am

      I accept to a point your reasoning but there the flaw in it is his justification for opposing it.

      The Bible didn’t say anything about homosexuality at all in my view. References to sex between men were references generally to promiscuous sexual relations and invariably when it was referring to these is was covering all options – men and women, and men and men (although I’m less clear about women and women to be honest).

      Other much lauded alleged references to homosexuality actually don’t hold up and are probably down to mistranslation. Some I’m sure done without malice, others I’m sure done by those promoting an agenda.

      Unfortunately religious indoctrination isn’t about questioning or trying to understand what is behind the words, and this is why it is so easy to manipulate the religious masses.

      Matey here, despite rising in the sphere or politics, shows a complete lack of leadership qualities. He shows he is willing to accept without question. His comments damage is campaign

      1. As I stated, his reasoning is misguided but not necessarily malicious or hateful.

        1. Sister Mary Clarence 6 Nov 2012, 1:55pm

          Sorry I ran out of space to make the point that I actually think it is reproachful. This guy has had every opportunity to avail himself of a world of knowledge and he has failed to do so.

          He hasn’t grown up in an impoverished household that could not afford to educate him. He is sufficiently educationally competent to run as a state representative. That kind of indicates that he is operating at quite a high intellectual level, and yet it hasn’t led him to question more the religious teaching he has had.

          The Bible is a moral code for those that don’t have, or don’t have confidence in their own moral compass. It is a guide to be interpreted, not a map to be followed.

          It was never intended as an object for the righteous to dip into as and when they want to persecute others.

          He should know much better – he’s behaviour is entirely reproachful

  23. Lord Henry Schmuckleton Baldyridge Jones-Snotting 6 Nov 2012, 5:57am

    There is not one Christian who lives by every law of the Bible. Not one. Christians need to stop picking and choosing which of God’s rules they want to follow. Follow them all including the disgusting ones for how to treat a woman who is menstruating or shut up about gay marriage.

    1. GingerlyColors 6 Nov 2012, 6:36am

      And no more pork pies and shellfish.

  24. Kind of funny how, according to Genesis, the man God formed a covenant with, Abraham, conceived his firstborn child with Hagar, the handmaid of his wife (who was also his half-sister) when he and his wife were having difficulties. So much for that one man, one woman crap.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 6 Nov 2012, 12:33pm

      And a little bit of incest thrown in of course with his half sister. One of many incestuous hetero relationship found in the book of fairy tales, yet equal marriage is supposed to create demand for it according to the religious nutters.

  25. Sam Maloney 6 Nov 2012, 6:04am

    What a heartless asshat…

  26. GingerlyColors 6 Nov 2012, 6:35am

    How low can some people get. I hope that this tactic backfires in David Johnson’s face.

  27. “he still disagrees with his late brother’s sexuality.”

    How interesting, does he also disagree with the sea?
    What about cows?
    Does he disagree with moustaches?
    What else does he disagree with?… rivers? artichokes? roads? doorknobs?

    1. At no point in the article is he quoted as disagreeing with anyone’s sexuality or, indeed, that he gave anyone that impression other than the writer of the story.

      1. I do find it… interesting… that an obviously factual statement gets so many negative votes.

        1. Harlequin 7 Nov 2012, 3:45am

          And that, since posting the above, even my comment ridiculing his ““kids do much better when raised by their married mother and father” statement has been voted down. It’s almost as if not sharing a desire to lynch the bloke leads some to believe that everything we heretics write must be wrong :)

  28. “He (god) constructed marriage this way for a reason. Numerous studies confirm this, showing that kids do much better when raised by their married mother and father.”

    Whereas properly conducted legitimate studies show that kids do equally as well when raised by same sex couples.

    1. David Nottingham 6 Nov 2012, 11:01am

      You are absolutely right. There is NO legitimate evidence that there is any significant difference between the acedemic and sociological abilities of children raised by same sex couples and mixed sex couples. So jog on, Mr Johnson!

      1. Dave North 6 Nov 2012, 2:31pm

        “There is NO legitimate evidence that there is any significant difference between the acedemic and sociological abilities of children raised by same sex couples and mixed sex couples”

        There is. They actually do better.

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2228417/Teenage-children-lesbian-parents-excel-school-happier-life.html

        1. OMG the dailymail published a story painting gays in a positive light?

  29. What a complete @$$hole ‘god’ sounds.

    Luckily it is make believe.

    As for this politician – he needs help for his mental illness.

  30. I take it that in Maine that ‘marriage redefinition’ is already legal in the form of heteresexual divorce. The Bible clearly states that adultery is a sin, and divorce is unrepentant sin at that. Yet people like Johnson who say that same-sex marriage redefines marriage and yet a silent on the issue of divorce are committing the grievious sin of hypocracy. For these types of ‘Christian’ a SIN is not SIN when that SIN is committed by the majority. (In the US 30% of marriages end in divorce but only c5% of the population is gay.)

    1. For these types of ‘Christian’ a sin is something other people do.

  31. Gay people know and love the religiously deluded bigots like David Johnson, we know they are doing wrong and harming gay people when they try to impose their beliefs upon us.
    Because we know and love religious bigots, we gays will not let them do us harm in their ignorance and so we strongly resist and oppose their wrong homophobic beliefs and actions .

  32. We even get the endlessly reiterated drivel about married opposite sex couples being the only people who give kids the best start in life. What fun his brother’s bereaved partner must have with this guy.

  33. Another of what I call the ‘Genitalianists’ – the simple minded cock/c__t definers of marriage.

  34. “The fact remains that God intended marriage to be between one man and one woman”

    Everyone is entitled to his own opinions but not his own facts.

  35. Jock S. Trap 6 Nov 2012, 11:38am

    What a horrible man.

    You either love people unconditionally or you don’t and don’t support them. You can’t have the ‘well some of my best friends are gay’ attitude when you clearly Don’t support them.

    How do idiots like this get in such powers of positions? I know they are elected with make the majority of electorate just as bad.

    They’ll loose the argument in the end and will, I hope, hang their heads in shame!

    1. I love my Mum but I don’t support everything she says or does.

      1. But do you try to limit her human rights? That’s what this man is trying to use his late brother for – to argue that LGBT people are less deserving of rights than others. He’s not just not supporting gay people – he’s actively campaigning to deprive us of rights HE enjoys.

        1. Many people, including homosexual people like myself, do not perceive a semantic change as a ‘human right’.

          1. A bit late, but I do want to add something on the whole ‘semantic change’ argument.

            The change may be just semantics, but that does not mean it is not an important one. Marriage equality isn’t just about marriage — it’s about equality, it’s about having the choice to have it. It’s a HUMAN RIGHT for everyone to be able to access what the majority of others can. Back in the fifties, many places had special entrances for black people to go into places like, say, shops. The shop experience was arguably the same for both black and white people. Maybe the blacks were snubbed by shop owners, maybe they didn’t get as good as the service white folks got, but still — they were allowed to go in, spend their money, and walk out with goods. The only problem was that they had to go through a different entrance.

            Marriage equality is the same. If civil unions were made the exact same as marriage, then we have the ask ourselves: why do we have two different names for the same thing?

        2. It’s not just a semantic change, Harlequin. And I’d politely suggest that your opposition may be a bit more than that because if it was just a ‘semantic change’ then you wouldn’t care so much, would you? But your opposition seems to be more than that. If YOU don’t want equal marriage, that’s fine, but you don’t speak for me or any of the many other LGBT people who DO want it.

          It’s your choice not to want marriage or want to get married, but it’s wrong of you to deny others that choice. It might not be important to you, but it IS to many, many other LGBT people.

          1. You may have missed the post in which I stated that I don’t greatly care because it’s now hidden by its negative votes. What I do care about is the mentality that results in painting people as evil just because they oppose same-sex marriage. I happen to think that such unions being officially termed ‘marriage’ would be lovely but I don’t think that those who don’t like the idea are hatemongers.

            If YOU want equal marriage, that’s fine, but you don’t speak for me or any of the many other LGBT people who DON’T want it.

          2. Oops, I forgot to ask, in what way do you believe that calling same-sex civil unions ‘marriages’ (all other things being equal, which I accept is not the case in some countries) not just a semantic change?

          3. Eep, another self-reply! I should have written, “If YOU want equal marriage, that’s fine, but you don’t speak for me or any of the many other LGBT people who DON’T want it or who DON’T think it particularly important.”

          4. You say you don’t care very much but then you sound very anti equal marriage. I find that confusing. That’s why I thought there may be more to your dislike than just ‘not caring’ or thinking it was a pointless semantic change.

            Yes, I agree that not everyone who is anti-marriage or anti-gay is evil. I didn’t call this man evil, my comment referred to his position on the bible because it really winds me up when people pick and choose what to abide by in the bible. I personally believe that homophobia is caused by ignorance just as often as hate (maybe more often – I don’t know).

            You had no need to alter and quote what I said because that was my whole point. I am fine with you not wanting to get married – absolutely fine – but all I asked was that you be equally fine with those who DO want equal marriage. It should be a choice open to all – and we should be free to choose it or equally not choose it.

          5. You ask “I forgot to ask, in what way do you believe that calling same-sex civil unions ‘marriages’ (all other things being equal, which I accept is not the case in some countries) not just a semantic change?”

            I’m not sure I have enough room to make my point here but I’ll try. Firstly, I want the option to get married (ie not have a same sex civil union and merely be allowed to call it marriage) just like I would have had if I’d been straight. A civil marriage (in the UK) is different from a civil partnership, and doesn’t have all the same rights. I see no reason why my sexuality should relegate me to a ‘lesser’ option any more than my skin colour. It makes no sense.

            Marriage should be gender neutral as in countries like Sweden. This would also help transpeople. We don’t have ‘black marriage’ or ‘pensioner marriage’ so why should we have a separate institution for gay people? Just have marriage and be done with it.

          6. Marriage isn’t just a word. It’s a widely recognised form of union. I don’t care if it’s called marriage or porridge but I DO care that whatever it’s called, we all have access to it no matter what our sexuality and that it’s called the same thing for everyone.

            To me it’s ridiculous that I’m not allowed a civil marriage. It’s like having a special door for Asian people or something. I find it offensive and unnecessary. I’m not forced to get a differently-named mortgage just because I’m gay, so why should I call my legal joining of myself with my girlfriend something different?

            Finally, it sends a message to society that LGBT people are somehow not quite as worthy as straight people, and this adds to homophobia and can mark us out as ‘justified targets’ for abuse.

          7. Harlequin 8 Nov 2012, 7:57pm

            As I hope you now realise, I am by no means “anti equal marriage”, although I’m a little puzzled as to how I may have given the impression that I was. I am also annoyed by people cherry-picking which bits of the bible (and it’s almost always from the Old Testament, even when used by Christians and Muslims who are supposed to be following later writings) but I do not equate all instances of doing so with malevolence. I am perfectly fine with same-sex marriage, indeed I would prefer an absence of gender distinctions in the institution; I just don’t think that people who oppose it are necessarily being hateful.

          8. Thank you for the clarification, Harlequin. Yes, many people are anti-equality for what they perceive to be ‘good’ reasons so, no, they’re not malevolent at all. Just misguided & ignorant (in a non-pejorative sense). If people like that took the time to get to know LGBT people & could realise that we’re no better & no worse than straight people, it’d be of benefit to us all.

            I do think some people are being mislead & mis-informed about what the bible says about gay people & about marriage. I often think that some people need an ‘enemy’ to denigrate, someone to label as ‘inferior’. In the past, this has been women and people with a different skin colour, now it’s gay people. I find it very depressing. I wish people would educate themselves & realise that we all have equal value as human beings & deserve equal rights.

            I don’t think this man is malevolent at all. I actually feel sorry for people like him. He’s fallen for all the anti-gay rhetoric, and lost sight of what’s important.

          9. Harlequin 8 Nov 2012, 8:14pm

            Having all registered partnerships legally referred to by the same word is, it seems to me, still only a semantic change, albeit one that would bring comfort to many and which evidently disturbs others. I feel it somewhat silly, however, to describe it as a “human right” any more than heterosexual couples are denied the “human right” to have their marriages legally referred to as civil unions. The matter of actual legal rights is another matter: I certainly think that all legal partnerships should carry the same benefits and responsibilities and perhaps we could have made better progress fighting for that first before igniting so much opposition because of the M-word. That written, the change will almost certainly, thankfully, have swept most of the Western world a decade from now as the detractors have lost the argument. I just ask that people not paint all of those detractors with the ‘malicious homophobe’ brush. Some of them just feel uneasy about the M-word and its tradition.

          10. Harlequin 8 Nov 2012, 8:34pm

            I thank you too for a reasonable discussion :)

            I still feel that the man is likely to have truly loved his brother and accepted his partner into his family as a friend and in-law. I suspect that he primarily opposes same-sex marriage because of his attachment to the traditional sense of the M-word and the fears that arise from change. Yes, he employs the pick-and-mix scriptural rhetoric used by those who really hate but it might well be more a case of ‘neophobia’ than ‘homophobia’.

          11. Your reasonableness is much appreciated too :) Thank you, and all the best to you.

  36. Nice to know that when push comes to shove this egregious twerp would chuck his deceased brother under a bus along with his boyfriend and everyone like them to placate his fictional demagogue on high.

  37. Jock S. Trap 6 Nov 2012, 12:12pm

    On a difference subject:-

    Nadine Dorries going on I’m a ‘Celebrity’ Get Me Out Of Here!!! hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

    1. If I know the public vote, she’s going to be eating a lot of kangaroo willies and tarantulas in the very near future.

  38. Robert in S. Kensington 6 Nov 2012, 12:27pm

    If you look at the old testament, the notion of God creating marriage is just not true. Allegedly, God took a bone from the side of Adam who was sleeping (Adam was created out of the dust of the earth apparently) and made Eve out of Adam’s rib. There was NO marriage ceremony to speak off and then there was the temptation in the Garden of Eden where a talking snake (the devil) tempted them into eating an apple, the forbidden fruit, and for that, Eve was cursed to “bring forth children in pain”. There was no exchange of marriage vows, no reference to any ceremony but merely implied by the fact that Eve was created for Adam. I mean, really, does any sane person believe that nonsense?

    Now civil marriage was most definitely NOT created by God but by man (just as religious marriage was). The two are entirely different. The civil version having NO religious component or religious cleric officiating, no admonition to procreate and divorced people allowed to remarry, end of.

  39. what an ass

  40. Jim Nashville Tn 6 Nov 2012, 4:03pm

    David Johnson .what a total republican asshole .. so I wonder does he talk to GOD .. how does he know what GOD intended .. and he keeps in touch with his brother’s partner that would be one call I wouldnt take ..

  41. How sick can you get. Not only stupid but evil. It appears to me — Republican = Moron.

  42. Chris R.A. Berry 6 Nov 2012, 6:59pm

    Discuss this? What a pathetic, ignorant and horribly sad man. Representative of whom and of what? This was painful to read. Truly.

  43. I just dont know how anyone anywhere is so powerful that they can actually speak for God. Honestly the arrogance is nuts!!!! Thankfully the brother isnt here to see what a horrible person his family member is. Shame!

  44. Gay Activist Paul Mitchell 6 Nov 2012, 11:55pm

    How low will some bigots will go, well they even prize themselves on so called “family values” while attacking your own brother!

    My brother is a bigot (because on the very fact he thinks same sex marriage should not be legal, but thinks civil unions are good enough for us), but at least he does not hate me! But I still respect his views, even though I do not actually agree with them!

    We always have political debates and philosophical arguments!

    1. Harlequin 7 Nov 2012, 3:47am

      I’m afraid that I fail to see how this man’s position differs from that of your brother.

      1. Could someone explain to me why it does?

  45. What a sad bastard! It only goes to prove that to rise in the US political system, a set of capable brain cells is NOT a requirement!

  46. …….why is it that so many heterosexuals believe ‘God’ only meant straight people to marry? How can anyone know?
    The fact is ‘God’ created Gay People also and all those heteros’ which feel the need to divide us are really being stupid and unfair.

    No human being knows what God wants. So all what the heteros’ do is show their fear and disdain. Honestly they ought to shut up and put up. Marriage is a human right not a heterosexual privilege!

  47. Henry Katziff 8 Nov 2012, 5:05pm

    I’ reminded of how my son was forced in school here in teh USA to go from lefty to righty

    Being left handed was the mark of the devil – welcome to xtianity again. Add lefties to rightees who have been victims again of the Jebus story.

    Its 20 years to late re statue of limitations to sue the b!tches of the church

    thank gud for typewriters compuetrs Ipads etc – my sons writing in horrific

  48. This Republican Party coward perfectly displays how religion can corrupt the mind – just one of many in his party.

    He publicly voices his contempt for his brother after his death. I can’t think of much more that is so disrespectful to his deceased brother. Does he hate him so much that he’s unable to leave him alone to rest in peace?

    Nothing from ‘christians’ surprises me anymore. Many appear to be stooping lower and lower with each passing day.

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