Reader comments · Source: 118 Tory MPs may vote against same-sex marriage · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Source: 118 Tory MPs may vote against same-sex marriage

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Andrew Pierce is a vile man as I ahve stated before and as for Conor Burns, he should be ashamed of himself if he votes against this.

    1. According to the mail Conor Burns said “‘I marvel at why we’re bringing this forward. There is no clamour for this at all within the gay community.’

      The C4M”s list of 118 MPs has identified a lot of fence sitters. If the bill was in front of Conor Burns is he realy saying he would vote against it. Lots of MPs are saying this in’t a priorty, they have concerns etc but it’s a scare story/lie to say that C4M has identified 118 Tory MP who will vote against SSM.

      PN has made a mistake in the article the quote ““I think you have got to have your head stuck in the Westminster bubble to think this is a priority.” was made by Douglas Carswell according to the mail.

    2. Mind you, I watched Andrew Pierce on television strongly supporting Stonewall’s right to call Cardinal O’Brien (who has since retired due to ill health [thank goodness]) bigot of the year.

    3. Robert in S. Kensington 25 Nov 2012, 4:30pm

      I find his excuse for voting against it very weak. Those religious nutters know already that no religious denomination is going to be forced to recognise or perform same-sex marriages. It’s a very lame argument but one that is so transparent. They really have no other argument to present because the new law will be about civil marriage. They already ban marriages for divorced people knowing they can have a civil marriage instead, one of the reasons it was invented by the state, so using SSM and the notion that denominations will be compelled to perform them is nothing more than a homophobic red herring. Burns and Pierce are both self-loathers and pandering to religious bigotry. If they really believe CPs are more than sufficient or equal as many of them say as far as the rights are concerned, then why haven’t they asked any of their fellow hetero bigots why they wouldn’t have one and if not, why not? Burns and Pierce are not too bright it seems.

  2. I read “the daily mail is reporting…” Then stopped reading.

    I wouldn’t take any of this article too seriously – clearly drivel.

    1. Quite so. Even if there are 118 Tory MPs who are against same-sex marriage (and there may well be that many), a significant proportion will be too busy brown-nosing the party leadership and will therefore vote in favour.

    2. Yes, indeed, we all know the Daily Mail is a stream of vile journalism. But the fact is, and we must never forget it, it is an extremely popular newspaper amongst millions of the British population. Most of those neighbours who grin and smile and wave when they see me and my partner pass by read The Daily Mail! (How do I know? Well, when they are ill or indisposed and I do errands for them, I have been shocked at how many of them ask me if I wouldn’t mind picking up a Daily Mail along with the bread and milk!)

  3. If this story is true and we do gain marriage equality then it will be in spite of and not because of the Tories.

    Then again who is surprised by that?

    Never trust a Tory.

    1. That There Other David 23 Nov 2012, 10:47pm

      I’m surprised the quoted figure is so low TBH. Sort of makes me think that the post-Thatcher generation Tories might finally be getting over themselves a bit.

    2. So, let me get this right:

      A Tory-Lib coalition propose it. A Tory PM personally speaks in favour or it, annoying many of his traditional supporters. Of 305 Tory MPs, seems 187 will probably support the measure.

      I don’t like the Tory party. Never voted Tory, probably never likely to.

      On the other hand, I’m not going to insult the intelligence of PN readers by twisting the facts we have to hand in a manner that would make the the propaganda dept of The Christian Institute wince with shame.

      1. This is a claim being made by the Daily Mail, not PinkNews!

        1. I was being critical of dAVID’s spinning, not PN.

      2. Aidan Curtin 24 Nov 2012, 4:46pm

        This isn’t just being ‘proposed’ by a Tory PM – it’s also being cynically used as a political gesture by a Tory PM. The Tories are determined to make use of SSM to try and demonstrate how modern they are; to ‘detoxify’ themselves. That’s not what a real commitment to lgbt equality should be about.

        The real story here is that 40% of Tory MPs still appear to have a discomfort with gay people and their place in society. That’s 40% of the MPs selected to be Tory candidates by Tory Party members.

        Besides all that, SSM is NOT the defining lgbt equality issue of our time. Look at what else Cameron has done: utterly flopped on homophobic bullying, attempted to completely gut the Equality and Human Rights Commission, consistently attacked the Human Rights Act (and the protections it grants LGBT people), and destroyed a number of other equality groups (including sexual health organisations) during his celebrated ‘bonfire of the quangos’.

        We shouldn’t be fooled by the Tory effort to use SSM

        1. I don’t care if they do it because the Lord Satan commands them to.

          End result: nice folks like you can (if you want to) marry the person of their choice. Which is more than Labour (my party of choice) proposed in umpteen years of government.

          So, as far as I care, they can be as cynical and manipulative as they like.

    3. Spanner1960 24 Nov 2012, 5:07pm

      At least the Tories have pushed for marriage and taken the church face on, which is more than can be said for Liebor with their compromises and fudged excuses.

      1. Most of the rabidly anti-gay politicians are in the Tory Party, but of course there are always exceptions. “Liebor”, that’s what the Mail readers call them.

  4. I don’t feel Andrew Pierce is “vile”, as some have suggested but he certainly does seem to be someone with a complex inner-life.

    Anyway, 118? OK, fine. Won’t stop the bill, so let them have a pouty sulk if they want to.

  5. OK. Let’s have some names then. Otherwise I just see this as the DM trying to drum up support and fear monger.

    Surely between the DM,Telegraph,CI and C4M they can get all these names together so they can shout them from the rooftops as heroes.

    1. The DM article lists the names.

    2. Mumbo Jumbo 23 Nov 2012, 10:55pm

      Follow the link in my post below. The names are all there. However, aside from the usual religious suspects, they are just MPs who have voiced concern in reply to constituents letters and it doesn’t mean they will necessarily vote against.

  6. Mumbo Jumbo 23 Nov 2012, 10:51pm

    Here is the link to the Daily Heil:

    This has to be one of the most twisted, mendacious and factually erroneous propaganda articles in a long and discreditable history of such articles in the Mail.

    If you’re reading this, Andrew Pierce, Uncle Tom is such an ugly term, but it is utterly inadequate to describe one such as you.

    Enjoy the adulation of Mail readers who love what you say but hate what you are, you sad, pathetic, worthless little cockroach.

    1. Blimey!

  7. If its not a priority issue to the majority of people- how come the Mail is devoting so much space to this ‘non story’??

    We all know that UK Civil Partnrships are NOT internationally reciprocated- and we also all know that civil partners do NOT have the same parenting rights as married partners. And -isn’t it christian B&B owners who are constantly telling us that they do not discriminate against gay couples- only those couples who are NOT married?

    And finally- when it DOES become law- can we really imagine that Andrew Pierce and his civil partner will not be upgrading to MARRIAGE?

    I think not!

    1. Rpbert in S. Kensington 23 Nov 2012, 11:54pm

      If he does, then we should hold him up for the bigot and hypocrite that he is and remind him of it.

  8. Well placed insider 23 Nov 2012, 10:57pm

    Andrew is confused. 118 is actually the number of gay Tory MPs. Seriously I’d be amazed if more than 20 vote against and most of them for genuinely held religious beliefs. No need to cancel those wedding plans yet boys and girls!

    1. 118 Tory bigot MP’s is erring on the cautious side, I suspect.

  9. Hmm. Even the Daily Mail’s headline is nonsense.

    It can’t be a rebellion as it’s a free vote. No three-line whip. Anyone even remotely connected with parliamentary workings knows that much.

    Still, why let basic facts get in the way of a good rant, eh? Typical DM.

  10. Typical Mail drumming up hate – I’d be really surprised if more that 70-ish Tories actually vote against, despite the noises a few have made to try to appease the constituents who scrawl six-page letters in green ink to them.

  11. I really wish that Pink News would stop using the phrase “gay marriage”. It’s widely used by opposers of marriage equality. Marriage is marriage – that’s what we’re fighting for.

    1. Yes, I agree, or better still “Marriage Equality”. That’s what we’re after.

    2. Yup that is why I always call it equal marriage … that is what indeed we are fighting for :)

  12. My local MP is one of the 118.
    And I feel a need to apologize for that fact.

    1. Perhaps you need to write to your MP if you haven’t already. A lot of these clowns say that no one in their constituency wants equal marriage and some of them probably believe that.

  13. Craig Nelson 23 Nov 2012, 11:51pm

    Not surprising. Many may abstain. Others may vote in favour once their ‘anxieties’ about churches ‘being forced etc etc’ are calmed by seeing the Bill as well as being able to amend it in both Houses.

    I generally think there will be 100- 150 against all told – out of a parliament of 650….

  14. Can the Daily Mail actually tell us who the 118 Tory MPs are. They’ve quoted only a handful in their article.

    The C4EM support website only has 62 Tory MPs against SSM and their website has been going on for sometime now and has a lot of detail compared to the brief details in the mail.

    I suggest the C4EM get cracking and update their list of supporters to counter this and update their list of the antis….

    Can the rest of the labour and lib dems MPs also start showing their support as well!!!!, some of them are still fence sitting.

  15. Sorry just saw the list on the mail. I think they should be cross checked with the C4EM list and the key word is MAY vote against. Many had been concerned about the church’s opt outs and I suspect they will be less interested in what the CofE thinks now after their no vote on women bishops.

    And I wish that phrase fast track could be dropped. The govt are 2 and half yrs into their term and still no bill (that’s not fast tracking).Since the Queen’s speech the house of lords reform has been dropped so plenty of parliamentary has been freed up and now they don’t even have to look at a women bishops bill for another 5 yrs. What on earth do the equalities office intend to do in the next 2 and half years if not SSM?

  16. Pavlos Prince of Greece 24 Nov 2012, 1:02am

    Brutus Pierce, and you too?

  17. The mail says the list of 118 MPs was compiled by C4M…..aren’t they a little bit bias!!!

    If it is a conscience vote for the Tories then there is no rebelliion as such so it can’t be a the biggest rebellion for the Tory party.

  18. The Daily Mail quotes MPs who oppose equal marriage, and they all seem to be motivated by religious considerations.

    We LGBT people alive today have the privilege of witnessing a crucial turning point in LGBT history.

    The LGBT campaign for equality needs to be turned into a global LGBT attack on fundamentalist religion: dogmatic Christianity, dogmatic Islam and dogmatic Judaism, and an exposure of the evil these inflict on society, and particularly on the lives of LGBT people.

    It is time to broaden our campaign to support our LGBT brothers and sisters in fascistic authoritarian Moslem countries, and to resist the forces of fundamentalist Islam and fundamentalist Christianity in the UK.

    We must also challenge the stupid left-wing tolerance of persecution from religionists in the spurious name of “cultural sensitivity” or “multiculturalism”. LGBT teenagers from anti-gay “Moslem” families particularly need our protection, support and solidarity.

  19. Will C4M please produce the other half of their list – the list of Tory MP’s who told them that (in spite of the mass letter writing campaign from the churches, faith schools etc) they were going to support a bill for marriage equality.

    For C4M to be only able to get 118 out of 303 tories to express some level of concern is a bit pathetic. I can identify a large number on the list who are NOT saying they will definitely vote against any bill, but that they question the timing or are concerned to ensure the effectiveness of opt outs for churches.

  20. We should hold out noses and get over to the mail online and leave comments just as the haters do and will do.

    1. I’ll have to abstain on this one.

      My blood pressure is through the roof this morning already

  21. I wonder if Pierce realises just how much many Mail readers will despise him because he is a gay Uncle Tom yet will happily use his words to support their hatred.

  22. GingerlyColors 24 Nov 2012, 6:42am

    That depends on whether or not they are too busy participating in reality TV shows on the other side of the world.

  23. The inaccuracy and deception of the daily mail report is astonishing. The poll quoted had a majority Christian sample group and was not representative of the general UK population at all. The Coalition for Marriage petition has been widely criticised as anyone in the WORLD can sign it, not just UK citizens, and you can sign it MULTIPLE times. And Civil Partnerships simply do not grant the same rights as marriage, it’s a myth. Inequality still exists in regards to parenting rights, and there are other massive issues such as adultery not being grounds for dissolution.

    Also if we’re going to assume 118 Conservative MP’s will “rebel” (during a free vote) against the measure based purely upon their, and I quote, “unease” about the issue, then we should also assume 185 of the Conservative MP’s will absolutely vote FOR marriage equality simply because they haven’t said anything – atrocious logic I know, but that means the majority of Conservatives, Lib Dems and Labour are in favour.

    1. The Daily Mail and C4M/Christian Institute (same bunch of a-holes using different names) have only the faintest understanding of decency.

      Their absurd religion may forbid “bearing false witness” but, as with all fundies, they feel they can flexibly interpret the word of their god.

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 24 Nov 2012, 12:26pm

      True, but having a majority in favour isn’t enough. What about the Lords, the biggest obstacle even if it passes safely in Parliament? There are enough religious bigots sitting there including those 26 Anglican bishops. That’s why I want Lords reform but ideally to abolish the upper chamber altogether, similar to New Zealand. Traditionally, it votes in favour of Parliamentary legislation which has passed, but this one issue could well induce them to block it as a protest against Cameron’s decision to pursue it assuming the majority of them oppose it. Nobody really knows, but I’m uneasy about it.

      1. The government can invoke the Parliament Act to override the Lords if needs be, but that depends on how the SSM Bill is ‘introduced’ to the House. I know – it’s all a bit daft.

        1. Robert in S. Kensington 24 Nov 2012, 3:21pm

          Yes, he could invoke the Parliament Act but as New Aussie said below, his position isn’t that strong in order to do just that, but who knows?

          There are 775 Lords, not including 28 who are on leave, a total of 803. I would imagine we’d need at least 402 to scrape through. Don’t forget, their vote for CPs was very minimal. I suspect equal marriage will have a harder time but I hope I’m pleasantly surprised.

          1. I’m a bit confused, Robert.

            The Lords can do as they wish if the Parliament Act is invoked. It would make no difference. The Bill would become and Act by the will of the Commons alone. A simple majority in that house is all that would be needed.

            Or did I misunderstand you? (Possible. I have a streaming cold and my brain is really not working at full speed!)

  24. Straight politicos speaking for gays, how distasteful !!

  25. Paul from Brighton 24 Nov 2012, 10:20am

    The list of names of the MP is very interesting, but of those I recognise, I’m not surprised.

    The Geographical areas are always very telling. For example, local to me we have Worthing – a place were old bigots come to spend some time driving badly, moan about the weather and ‘foreigners’ before finally doing the only worthwhile thing they’ve ever done, which is to die quietly in private nursing home…

    Then you have the MP for Chichester, MP for the New Forrest (Lymington), all very wealthy, stale ex-stockbroker/banker/lawyer retirement strongholds.

    No surprises here.

    Arundel have got Nick Herbert, ex Police Minister who is gay and he’s thankfully not listed.

    Littlehampton have got Nick Gibb who was ex-schools and a really decent bloke, again not listed.

    Brighton has got Simon Kirby, again not listed.

    As I said those named seems to depend more on where the area they’re based than on any personal conviction.

    That’s politics for you.

  26. Personally I am surprised it is as low as 118. Other than the new intake, most of the Tory MPs in parliament have a long history of trenchant opposition to any gay rights legislation. It is a tribute to Cameron that he has obviously persuaded a sizeable number of these to change their minds.

    But this is nothing to worry about. The bill will easily pass the Commons. It is the LOrds we should worry about as well as the 26 Anglican bishops sitting there.

    My prediction is that England and Wales will not get gay marriage in this parliament as it will be continually blocked by the Lords and Cameron is not in a strong position to use the Parliament Act to get it through.

    So Scotland will be the only nation in the UK to actually have gay marriage.

    1. GingerlyColors 24 Nov 2012, 1:33pm

      We will have to elope to Gretna Green then.

    2. Craig Nelson 24 Nov 2012, 7:04pm

      I give the Bill a 50/50 chance in the Lords. It should pass, even if amended there if there is a big Commons majority. The plan for the Bill should account for this possibility and allow for the use of the Parliament Act. This is certainly where the most parliamentary time will be taken up. Another reason to get on with it.

    3. Scotland doesn’t have it yet. The Scottish Government is currently drafting the Bill (although I had expected it by now) and a majority of MSPs have pledged support. None of this guarantees that marriage equality will become reality in Scotland, although it is very likely. But there’s still another consultation of the Bill itself ans Salmond has promised to listen to all views once again, so there will always bd a chance (even a tiny one) that it could be dropped altogether at some point.

  27. Connor Burns is a blight on the normal sunny disposition of Bournemouth!

    1. and worse he is my MP :(

  28. Just more desperate fabricated C4M anti-equality propaganda being spread by the Daily Mail, The Telegraph and The Spectator, no surprises there.

    1. Paul from Brighton 24 Nov 2012, 1:44pm

      No don’t see how you work this out?

      From my reading of the article, the Daily Mail has been busy working away in the background collating all the email/written replies from Tory MPs who have been contacted by their constituents who are opposed to SSM.

      Daily Mail have now published the numbers, and the names, so I can’t see what they have fabricated?

      Let’s keep a sense of reality here. In my view this list is most useful as it shows those of us who live in certain voting catchment areas, for example close to me – Chichester, Worthing – that it really is vital to contact your MP and make your case known and to ask them to justify theirs.

      Let’s use this to our advantage rather than getting all hot and annoyed without doing anything.

      In my view this is an own-goal and if I were an MP I wouldn’t want my views known at such an early stage.

      1. You need to look a little more deeply, Paul.

        Check the @C4EqualMarriage Twitter feed and you will find out that the Mail did not compile the list, the CI/C4M lot did.

        You’ll also see that the Mail’s list some contains MPs who expressed an ambivalent/neutral response.

        1. Paul from Brighton 24 Nov 2012, 2:08pm

          OK, I will stand corrected on how they’ve compiled the list. I have’nt looked at The Twitter feeds for C4EM, however I don’t believe that the Daily Mail would just publish the names of these MPs stating they oppose SSM when they’re neutral on the subject.

          In any event, my original call to action still stands, and probably even more so – if you’re living in an area where an MP is sitting on the fence, or being neutral or ambivalent, those who live in his/her area need to contact them and make their views known.

  29. In terms of numbers, this isn’t enough to de-rail a Bill. But it does show that there are still an awful lot of bigots in the Conservative party when they are prepared to vote against their party in government over this issue.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 24 Nov 2012, 3:59pm

      But the conservative bigots in the House of Lords could! Exactly what C4M, CoE and RC churches are hoping for.

      1. Yes, you’re right, I completely forgot about the Lords! It is possible they could vote against it which would mean the Bill taking longer at best and being dropped altogether at worst. Hopefully it will get passed in the Lords, although personally I fear there’s a good chance it won’t.

  30. On a side note, Michael Gove has just declared that his department is preparing legislation that would make it impossible to deny adoption and fostering rights on ideological grounds. This means that couple of homophobes who have been recently denied the right to foster and adopt because of their views on homosexuality will be able to challenge and possibly reverse the decision.

    1. So two members of the BNP would have no problem in adopting?

      1. Michael Gove said he is currently paving the way to introduce legislation that would theoretically outlaw the discrimination of party (or ideological) affiliation by fostering/adoption workers and agencies. So the answer to your question is: BNP supporters would probably have no problems, and potentially even Nazzi supporters could be given the green light.

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 24 Nov 2012, 6:41pm

      He would wouldn’t he because he’s a catholic? Look what he did with that C4M petition in catholic schools.

  31. Robert in S. Kensington 24 Nov 2012, 2:28pm

    I’ve no doubt equal marriage will pass in Parliament, but its that troublesome House of Lords which could really throw a spanner in the works. They’ve been blocking legislation more than 400 times since 1999 and from what I’ve read, the trend is on an upward trajectory. That doesn’t bode well at all given the number of conservative bigots who sit there including those Anglican bishops, 26 of them, of course, all of them unelected. That’s not democracy at all in my view. Abolish the upper chamber altogether or if not, subject all of them to the electorate. Somehow, the thought of voting for a bishop wouldn’t appeal that much to the British public I don’t think.

    1. I think the Lords should be fully elected. An upper chamber is necessary in my view. The Scottish parliament has no upper chamber and that can be equally undemocratic when there’s a majority government as that government cannot be held to account if oppositon MSPs are blocked in committees by the government MSPs, for example.

  32. Getting to the bottom of the conservative barrel. Some quarters of the Tory party are already considering a deal with UKIP to maintain their usurpation of power. The next logical step will be to make a deal with BNP, that’s the race to the bottom being promoted by the Tories. But is BNP the real bottom of the Tory’s barrel? Of course not, there are still a few other astrayed conservative grouplings awating in the fringes to have their ideologies reintegrated into their natural conservative home. Some other such deals are under constant consideration. You may ask, where do “teh gays” fit in all this? We are very very “popular” at the bottom of the conservative barrel’s ideology…

  33. Sky News questioned some of the MPs on the list . Several said that they would not vote against the Government. The list as an indication of intentions to vote against equal marriage does not, therefore, seem to be accurate.

  34. What is it with soo many public figure ,self loathing, gay uncle toms in this country? like burns. But he is right on one thing , there needs to be less apathy from lgbt regarding equality.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 24 Nov 2012, 6:40pm

      I agree with the apathy. The reason why some at C4M and Tory backbenchers are saying that the gay community isn’t clamouring for equal marriage, incorrectly assuming that support for it isn’t that high. Whether people like Pierce want marriage for themselves or not, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t support it for the majority of us who do. He’s typical of their self-loathing American counterparts (gay republicans) who vote against their own interests by voting for people who like to oppress them. They’re all delusional and suffering from a mega-dose of Stockholm Syndrome.

  35. Craig Nelson 24 Nov 2012, 7:10pm

    This story illustrates the point that they seriously need to get on with it or give up on the whole idea. Hanging around is not an option and the opposition will just get a lot worse the longer it is delayed.

  36. You have to be a right-wing homophobe to love a gay man like Andrew Pierce.
    And I don’t believe it’s anything like 118.
    It will pass, even with a substantial Tory revolt. Which is why they are going even more bananas than they usually do.

  37. I wonder how many of those MPs are actually gay themselves, but have been forced into high society marriages by their parents?

    Looking on jealously at gay people living their lives, while they have to pretend to be straight 24 hours a day. Homosexuality is rife between students in public schools, always has been. They don’t just suddenly become ‘straight’ when they leave.

    There’s definitely some bitterness and jealousy among the 118 MPs.

  38. As a tory who has been involved for years I know that whilst some of these MP’s are opposed some of the names on the list are people who definitely don’t.

    The names have been gathered from Daily Mail readers that wanted a reply. They forget that the MP’s are trying to garner support and the letters they send back are well worded so as not to offend anyone. Take it with a pinch of salt…especially as its the Mail

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 25 Nov 2012, 4:37pm

      Thank you Katrina. I do wish every gay voter in his constituency writes to him. Burns needs to come forward with the factual evidence to support his claim. Who are these gay people he claims to speak for? When did he become their representative if not StonewallUK? Could they even be anti-gay straight people pretending to be gay to give the impression more are against than for? It makes me wonder just how many did that for the C4M petition as well as for the consultation? BIgots are capable of any underhanded methods to score points and skew polls in their favour. They can use multiple email addresses, different user names and provide a false home address. Most email providers allow several user ID’s, as many as 7 to 10. Its very easy to bolster poll numbers against equal marriage. Comres is a master of it.

  39. Robert Brown 24 Nov 2012, 8:10pm

    Would be interesting to know which ones so that local peeps in those areas can start to engage with them.

  40. Remember if the Equality Marriage Bill is introduced and passed by the House of Commons and fails in the House of Lords – remember under the Parliament Act 1912 it goes straight to the Queen for Royal Assent!

    That is exactly what happened to the Sexual Offences Equality Bill ten years ago!

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 25 Nov 2012, 12:59pm

      Cameron has to invoke the Parliament Act to get royal assent. There has been no discussion if the Lords block passage of the legislation, certainly none from Cameron or Clegg, although I’m sure they’re aware of that undemocratic obstacle ahead of them.

  41. Is it not the case that it takes a year for the invocation of the Parliament Act to take effect?

  42. That’s would be right thing to do for them!
    Country needs some restrain against crazy homo-politics….

  43. GulliverUK 26 Nov 2012, 7:56pm

    Pierce will say anything for money. He says he also sits on a committee on Stonewall members and had no idea that the majority of gay people wanted equal marriage – so he’s completely divorced from real gay people. He walked past me the other day and I knew I should have stuck my foot out and tripped him down the escalator !!! :) He’s a nobody, just because he writes for an infamous newspaper, with a falling circulation. Pay them enough money and these journos will did a jig, tell a story, fabricate anything you like, and prostitute themselves. Some of them have the same morals as a serial killer or a rapist. More the point, people like that should not be involved with Stonewall, period.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.