Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Labour Shadow Justice Minister Rob Flello to vote against same-sex marriage equality

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Christo-fascism again – Obliging everyone to agree with their dogmatic BS is beyond tedious and for him to represent “justice” is a joke (but Labour have been gutless and rudderless for a while now, so not surprised).

    …and I bet I’m not the only one consistently misreading his name either…

    1. As he is “a very religious man” it would be interesting to get his views on the right of adulterers to remarry?

  2. Again thats his personal view which should not interfere with others having equal rights. His there to represent his constitutes not put personal belief ahead of the people he is meant to represent.

    Shame on you Rob fiello

  3. Robert (Kettering) 20 Jan 2013, 2:28pm

    Tell this bigot that he doesn’t sit as a Christian Democrat MP in Parliament and therefore his religious views should not come into issues of equality.

    Just another homophobic bigot who needs chucking out of office.

    1. The only bigot in this discussion, Robert, is your grotesque intolerance directed at someody for holding a view and belief he has every right to hold in a free and democratic society.

      Rob Flello is not anti-gay and therefore is not himself a bigot towards gay people.

      He, like many gay people themselves, happen to believe that Civil Partnerships fulfill such rights admirably.

      What are you, the thought police?

      Less of the rabid knee-jerking please.

      1. Robert (Kettering) 20 Jan 2013, 7:09pm

        I happen to be a Gay man not content to sit at the “back of the bus” because of bigottery and to be honest the homophobes and bigots have had quite enough to say, including yourself it seems, about LGBT rights and what crumbs of equality I’m expected to accept because of the religious lobby!

      2. Thar she blows! Self loathing Sammy wades in.
        Rob Fiello is most definitely anti-Gay no matter what he says. You can’t vote for segregation and claim not to be a racist. 100% of the votes against equality are from bigots.

      3. Jock S. Trap 21 Jan 2013, 11:22am

        Samuel B

        He’s not an MP for his own conscience, he’s there to SERVE the will of his constituents! His own bigotry should Never conflict with his duty.

  4. The religion industry is such a compassionate thing.

    Really though, aren’t they breaking trade description laws with all their discriminating hate.

    It’s easy for him to say he supports civil partnership. To him, that’s just a devil’s play pit where straights need not stray.

    The moment equality is mentioned, the meek go wild.

  5. This man believes in and supports injustice – how can he be justice minister?

  6. Jock S. Trap 20 Jan 2013, 2:34pm

    Yet another MP working on his own conscience Not in the interest of his constituents.

    MP’s need to be reminded they were voted in to work for us not for their conscience!

    Also… yet another person who has not only ignored the fact NO church or religion is being forced to marry us but clearly thinks Religious Freedom means denying other accepting faiths the choice to.

  7. “Rob is a very religious man””

    No, he’s just a schmuck who wants to impose his religion on others.

    This is why I fully support Richard Dawkins and others who criticise religion. Religious people show time and time again that they are not capable of keeping their religion to themselves. They must impose it on other people. So we have to criticise. If they choose to make it public and impose it on other people rationalist people (atheists) should attack it.

  8. He’s had the last vote he will get from me.

    1. And, hopefully, he’s had the last vote from every gay man and gay woman in Stoke on Bloody Trent!

      Don’t forget, you Stokers! Vote this Jack-the-Lad OUT!

      1. Unfortunately Eddy that’s not very likely. Most people in Stoke-on-Trent are a bit like sheep and just follow what other people are doing and don’t think for themselves.

        The electorate of the city think “My parents, grand parents and great grandparents voted for Labour so I will too!” That’s one of the reasons why the city is in such a state at the moment, it also doesn’t matter who the Labour party parachute in to be elected they will just vote for them. They don’t think about a candidates policies, beliefs or commons voting records, they just check that they’re wearing a red rosette!

        I’m a proud Stokie, and love the city, but I despair at how the people of S-o-T behave when it comes to politics.

  9. Robert (Kettering) 20 Jan 2013, 3:20pm

    Perhaps the Shadow Justice Minister should think a bit about the INJUSTICES the LGBT community face still. His attitude stinks. I’m sick of paying my taxes etc yet expected to be a second class citizen because of religious bigottery.

  10. ‘…Rob is a very religious man… but is a great supporter of civil partnership…’

    Such contradiction, I would like an explanation how is it possible to be both

    1. Actually it’s not a contradiction at all. I am a gay man, I’m married and I have strong religious beliefs – oh and I consider myself to be rational as well. All the people here espousing religious hatred – you’re acting like the worst kind of religious bigots – no respect for other people’s views because you don’t hold them. Do you realise, or even care how offensive YOU can be to gays who are Christian, Muslim, Pagan etc?

  11. If you are “a very religious man” then stand as an independent on a religious platform at the next election. You won’t get elected and will lose your place at the trough, but at least you will have demonstrated some honesty. Just to remind you, we did not vote for a theocracy.

  12. Another mealy mouthed hypocrite who uses his religion to try and disguise his bigotry. Sorry, Rob. We’re not fooled. If you think gay people should have to make do with Civil Partnerships, then you are in favour of segregation – that makes you a bigot.

  13. If I was as straight as it’s possible to be and was one of this man’s constituents I would be very concerned about whether he voted on any issue according to instructions from Rome. Looks like he may do.

    1. I am one of his constituents, and this is a pattern I’m afraid, as he was one of the handful of MPs to support Mad Nadine Dorries’ efforts to essentially eliminate abortion. I have had a three page letter from him on this subject, which was pretty much directly lifted from the Archbishop of Westminter’s press release, and actually tries to seriously argue that legalising gay marriage will ultimately lead to the legalisation of polygamy!

      1. Yes, working for the vatican paid for by us. Imagine the uproar if an MP was influencing policy according to directives from another state? He/she would be denounced as an agent for a foreign power

  14. For he’s NOT a jolly good Flello, for he’s NOT a jolly good Flello, for he’s NOT a jolly good Flello, and so say all of us!

    1. But Miliband would deny! ;-)

  15. Pavlos Prince of Greece 20 Jan 2013, 4:05pm

    He ‘does not agree with same-sex marriage taking place in the church’. Hello, welcome back to the future! As for 2013, gay marriage still is and will be impossible in all churches of England and Wales, who are against it, and Church of England is even banned from doing this. Please, look for another argument to justify your homophobia, Mr. Flello.

  16. Sean Johansen 20 Jan 2013, 4:23pm

    That happens to be the MP who is in my constituency in the UK. I will be writing to him to vent my wrath :) ….. Live in the US now but my dad still lives in the area so will use his address.

  17. SHAME on him! Thank goodness I don’t live in Stoke! Mind you, if I did then I know where my next vote WOULDN’T be going!

  18. Dave North 20 Jan 2013, 4:33pm

    “After graduating, Flello worked for a short time at Cadbury in Bournville before joining the Inland Revenue. In 1989 he left to join Price Waterhouse accountants as a personal tax advisor. In 1995 he moved to Arthur Andersen then in 1999 he co-founded Platts Flello Limited, tax and financial advisors. In late 2003 he left to work as the CEO of Malachi Community Trust until December 2004.”

    Didn’t his Jesus have LOTS to say about tax collectors.

    1. Dave North 20 Jan 2013, 4:35pm

      Just where do the F#ck1n closed minded religious goons get off.

      CIVIL SECULAR MARRIAGE.

      Just what do they not understand about that.

      Keep your illogical nonsensical religious drivel to your church.

      GET IT OUT OF MY FACE.

      1. It’s the whole “horrid” idea of sharing “his” marriage with vile and filthy homosexuals who are denigrated by his Holy Book, that’s getting his goat, Dave.

        These straights are often so insecure they wear their marriages like a badge of achievement, and if the queers can attain such an achievement . . . then they feel everything they have fought for will have been in vain. Yes, “getting married” for a lot of straight men is quite an achievement. It’s “touch and go” for a lot of them, particularly the ones with sublimated feelings for other men!

    2. His job probably had more to do with tax avoidance. I have never heard of a tax adviser trying to get you to pay more.

  19. bobbleobble 20 Jan 2013, 4:53pm

    I’m so fed up of these so called religious people using ‘I’m religious’ as a kind of get out of jail free card and getting away with it. It’s almost as if saying that you’re religious means you can hold whatever views you like without question.

    Mr Flello is so religious that he actually wants to restrict the freedom of other religious people just because he doesn’t like the idea of gay people marrying in any church not just his own. You know what, everyone has to put up with stuff they don’t like but it doesn’t mean that those things should be banned.

    Shame on you Mr Flello. And the worst thing is that this isn’t even a personal letter, he hides not only behind his religion but also his staff. So not only a bigot but a coward too.

    1. He has actually sent a letter to at least one constituent.

  20. I strongly disagree with Rob Flello. But I don’t understand why MPs should be criticised for voting with their conscience. MPs aren’t robots and should not merely follow what they are told to do. If you disagree, constituents can vote for another candidate, which I would do if he was my MP.

    1. Richard, I can understand using the “conscience” argument for saying all people deserve equal rights. But I’m not sure it’s a valid excuse to deny rights to a group of people, especially when the person with the so-called “conscience” enjoys those rights..

    2. I’m criticising him for his position that his religious faith should have a prioritised role in government. If his religious faith stops him from voting yes he should absolve himself of the responsibility.

  21. Apart from being incredibly impoverished, Stoke also has a very large Muslim community. I wonder if Mr Flello’s ‘principled stand’ and this fact are in any way related?…

    1. He’s a Roman Catholic, I suspect it’s becuase he cares more about what the Pope has told him to do rather than what the Muslims think.

    2. The Muslim vote in Stoke South is actually comparatively small when compared to Stoke North and Stoke Central, and given that his arguments in defending his position are pretty much directly lifted from the Archbishop of Westminster’s briefing paper, I would suggest his position is far more influenced by his Catholicism than an attempt to court the Muslim vote.

  22. A politician being allowed to vote with his conscience as opposed to being barbarically whipped into submission.

    A reminder that we still live in a civilized democracy, by all accounts.

    1. What is a person’s conscience? Do racists have “a conscience>”

    2. That There Other David 20 Jan 2013, 8:54pm

      However, the “conscience” in this case appears to belong to Herr Ratzinger sitting in a Renaissance Palace funded by the world’s poor.

      If it waddles like a cult and quacks like a cult….

    3. Oh Shut up you self loathing Twat – An MP represents this constituency Not his own views – especially not his own Superstitions!

    4. bobbleobble 20 Jan 2013, 9:24pm

      Unless that MP is taking orders from his master in Rome as appears to be the case here.

  23. Robert in S. Kensington 20 Jan 2013, 5:56pm

    Why doesn’t Ed Miliband confront him face to face, tell him that this is about civil marraige only and doesn’t affect anyone’s marriage in a religious edifice. What part of civil and religious does he not understand? I blame it on the party leadership, all three parties in fact. This entire debate has been badly handled and information disseminated in a haphazard way while the bigots in opposition have been running rough-shod over it and getting away with the most vile statements without as much as a challenge. That’s why I wanted a whipped vote. The rate that this entire thing is going, there may not be enough votes to see it through in Parliament with morons like Flello, probably a catholic with an Italian name like that. There should be a ban on any MP using religion to influence his pr herposition as a representative of all their constituents some of whom happen to be gay, straight and non-religious.

    1. How in a democracy can you ban MPs voting according to their religious beliefs? If people don’t agree with their MP they can be voted out at the next election. Some MPs have voted against going to war because of their religious beliefs. Should this be banned?

      1. bobbleobble 20 Jan 2013, 10:09pm

        It’s hardly democratic if MPs follow the orders of their religious leaders now is it? I’m not sure who appointed the Pope as an arbiter of what laws should be passed in the UK.

      2. Jock S. Trap 21 Jan 2013, 11:27am

        Yeah.. Religious democracy = Do as I say or else!

        Hardly democratic and nothing to do with politics.

        If he wants a religious conscience be a priest!

        1. I am not religious, but religous people have every right to stand for election and, if elected, vote as they wish and for whatever reason. As long as I have a right to vote them out.

  24. Robert in S. Kensington 20 Jan 2013, 6:04pm

    Now where is StonewallUK in all this?

  25. His position in the shadow cabinet should be minister for injustice. For those who believe that there should be a conscience vote, consider this: A proposal to deport all Jews and a proposal to remove civic rights from all black people.

    1. Don’t give him any ideas!

  26. ““Rob….does not agree with same-sex marriage taking place within a church, but is a great supporter of civil partnership.”

    Do these people specialise in sentences that don’t make any sense? The first bit’s OK – he doesn’t agree with SSMs in church and that’s fine – but in that case the second bit of his sentence should read “but he supports equal CIVIL marriage”.

    No church will be forced to marry same sex couples, and if he objects to SSM in religious places then what’s his probelm with having them in NON-religious places?

    Yet again, an ‘anti’ gives a reason that doesn’t make sense. I’ve not read a single logical argument against equal civil marriage, and I reckon half the people opposing it don’t even understand 1) That religion doesn’t own marriage; 2) That a marriage doesn’t have to be in a church; and 3) That ‘sinners’ get married every day – atheists, divorcees, non-Christians, all have a civil marriage that impinges on nobody else’s rights at all. So WHY oppose it, Fiello?

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 21 Jan 2013, 1:02pm

      Exactly, Iris. However, not one MP in support has dared to draw a line in the sand and spell it out for them. They right wingers are getting a lot of media coverage. How often do we hear supportive MPs countering the lies and misinformation? Never! I”m very uneasy as to the outcome of the vote as we’re constantly bombarded with negativity, hardly any positive commentaries in the media or indication that there really are enough votes to push it through. I see no sense in legislating if the votes aren’t there. We already know who the opponents are. A whipped vote would have taken care of it. I blame the three party leaders for not taking a firm stand with the opposition. Instead, all we get from them are wimpy deferential comments towards those who will vote no. Absolutely shameful.

  27. Rob Fello knows full well that no church will be forced to hold marriage ceremonies for gay couples if they do not wish to. He must know that many Christians and Jews and (yes) Muslims too, wish to hold marriage for LGBT people. By glibly dismissing marriage equality, he is attacking the conscience of other religious believers, as well as attempting to maintain social segregation. Religious belief is no excuse for denying equality. I hope the people of Stoke do not let him get away with such a devilis answer.

    1. Devious answer, I meant, obviously.

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 21 Jan 2013, 1:07pm

      I agree Adrian. The thing is, everthing you say is absolutely right but why aren’t supportive MPs saying the same thing? They don’t. They allow this nonsense to run amok and unchallenged. I just don’t understand their reticence to get involved. Expect more mendacious crap as the vote approaches. The right wing religious bigots will up the ante and the hysteria will reach fever pitch which could scare a few of the gullible, undecided MPs and cause the legislation to go down the toilet, the very thing they want to bring about.

  28. I’m remarkably close to this guys constituency unfortunatly, it doesnt help that the MP for Stone (Bill Cash) where i live (just outside of stoke) is even worse than this guy. looks like i have no chance whatsoever of having my views represented in this so called democracy:(

  29. Edmund Rodgers 20 Jan 2013, 7:00pm

    He is a loyal son of Pope Benny so what do you expect. He owes his first allegiance to a foreign political power

  30. Does anyone know how to update his wiki page under the controversy section and to link this story to it?

    1. It’s easy, Ed. You can do it. Just go to Wiki and sign up and make any reasonable and justifiable change you believe is appropriate. Speak the facts in a moderate way, citing a source, and there’s every chance your addition will not be removed by somebody else.

  31. They really shouldn’t be bringing religion into politics like this.

    1. Surely religion has as much right as sexuality to be brought into politics, especially where sexuality is clearly being used on a global scale to demoralise and shake at the foundations of religious institutions.

      As a non-religious Jewish gay man, I am able to step out of my self-interested gay cocoon and objectively consider how the denigration and eventual disintegration of religion itself would leave society without any form of moral compass or glue that binds society into a cohesive and mutually respecting whole.

      Yes, religion does have its loopy extremist fringe but so too does the gay world, but they are the minority no matter how loud they scream and shout.

      If religion falls then tyrannical governments seize all power, with no balancing force to stop societies becoming morally corrupted and bankrupted like those who rule over them.

      Without faith to cling onto, religious or spiritual, humanity can only devolve into an underclass of feral serfs totally controlled by the state.

      1. bobbleobble 20 Jan 2013, 9:04pm

        What utter complete nonsense. Religion has just as much of a history of joining up with tyrannical governments as it does opposing them.

        You’re mixing up religion and morality. Religion doesn’t promote morality, it promotes its own rules and has the audacity to claim that because they appoint themselves the representative of some god or other on Earth they have some kind of monopoly over what is moral or otherwise.

        I don’t want religion to vanish because it gives a lot of people a lot of happiness but it does not do the things that you claim in your nonsense hyperbole. And when it is used to limit another’s rights then it gives up any claim to morality.

      2. …and that is not a sacrifice I am prepared to make by participating in the current global agenda to steamroll gay marriage through at all costs without a proper and open date, when that agenda is seeking to ride roughshod over and, ultimately, marginalise and obliterate all religion, especially Christianity.

        Perhaps the end game is that we will put our belief and faith in capitalism and globalisation instead:- the same Gods as those who are striving for a more globalised world, which can only be accomplished by destroying people’s belief in a religious God?

        I think we do ourselves the greatest disservice of all in not seeing how gay people are being used for various nefarious agendas such as this in the relentless push towards methods of control that, ultimately, are designed to diminish and undermine all our freedoms and values.

        It really is time we stopped banging the drum of equal rights come what may, stepped back a little and opened our eyes up to the bigger picture…

        1. bobbleobble 20 Jan 2013, 9:20pm

          Paranoia too eh?

          In what way is religion being rode roughshod over when many religious people are on our side? And I’m not simply talking about the Quakers and Unitarians here but Anglicans and Catholics who support our views.

          You give religion and the religious far too much credit for someone who claims to be non-religious.

          It’s time to stop banging the drum of equal rights? That’s a really stupid thing to say Samuel.

          1. I’m afraid that stupidity and naivety is all that we are going to get from Samuel. He just clearly does not understand the arguments. Experience in a number of countries in Europe had already demonstrated that equal rights to marriage (not gay marriage as he incorrectly says) had had no detrimental effect whatsoever on society, morals or established religion. Shame that we have to tolerate such apologists amongst our ranks. But each to his own!

        2. That There Other David 21 Jan 2013, 11:40am

          So the rise in atheism is also down to us now? I’m amazed we’ve got the time, what with destroying the human race and causing all those natural disasters. Shows how good we are at multi-tasking I suppose.

          Samuel, you should go and read some Plato. It’s a good foundation on how ethics can exist without the need for religion. Also a nice reminder that ethics and morality existed before monotheism came on the scene.

          Religion is a sham. It tries to convince us we need it, when in reality the reverse is true. The only sad thing about it is that lie is now so old the liars don’t even realise they’re lying these days.

      3. ‘… If religion falls then tyrannical governments seize all power, with no balancing force to stop societies becoming morally corrupted and bankrupted like those who rule over them…’

        Lets hope religion won’t fall in places like Iran

      4. Samuel B, your premise – namely that sexuality is “being used on a global scale to demoralise and shake at the foundations of religious institutions” – is incorrect.

        If anything, the high profile of gay people together with recognition of their rights has led humanity to a higher state of morality than ever existed in previous centuries. Many millions of religious people do recognise and welcome this change.

  32. Absolutely disgraceful putting The Pope BEFORE the constituents who elected him.

    Remember-at the next Election!

  33. Hi defensive statement makes no sense. The new legislation is about civil marriage. If he is religious he should respect the right of those religions who wish to bless same sex partnerships.
    He’s a moron and a disgrace to his party. This “conscience vote” is a bigots charter.

  34. GulliverUK 20 Jan 2013, 8:11pm

    He seems to want to impose his religious views on everyone in the UK, including all other faiths – even though other faiths do want to offer same-sex religious services. But he doesn’t care about that.

    At the end of the day marriage is a purely secular contract with the state – not with any particular religion. The religious ceremony carries no legal weight – once it’s over everyone has a marriage certificate, whether you did it in a registry office or church.

    Seems very bigoted to me, especially as churches won’t be forced to do it, but some Catholics can’t see the wood for the trees.

    If the role of government is to seek to put right injustice and in particularly to help minority groups, as he has written elsewhere, then it seems entirely hypocritical to impose his religious beliefs on everybody else.

    If every gay person in his constituency voted for another party next election he might well be out. I couldn’t vote for someone who sought to prevent equal rights.

  35. Paul Brownsey 20 Jan 2013, 8:46pm

    Like so many others–even, I am sorry to say, one LGBT activist I encountered at an Equality Network meeting–he seems to be in the grips of the false idea that marriage=church, civil partnership=registry office. No: we are talking about same-sex civil marriage plus religious marriage by those organizations that care to offer it.

    Oh dear, the idea that marriage is owned by religion and that even civil marriages are really religious marriages carried out somewhere other than in church is dismayingly widespread, even among those whose business is to know better.

  36. Is there a Mrs Fellatio? I wonder.

  37. PeterinSydney 20 Jan 2013, 9:45pm

    Sack this disgraceful fellow. He does not deserve to have any responsibility in government.

  38. A reminder that opposition to equal marriage does not come exclusively from the Conservative benches. Many Tory MPs are campaigning hard for LGBT equality.

    I hope that, as a result of all this, many more people in the global population will become much more aware of how dogmatic religion stands in the way of human progress.

  39. It seems his website is undergoing maintenance, convenient or what?

  40. A Labour MP (I think) in this recent interview (http://playpolitical.typepad.com/uk_conservative/2013/01/more-tory-mps-may-break-with-cameron-on-gay-marriage-than-on-europe-or-lords-reform.html ) suggests that 20% of labour MPs will vote against SSM (because they are Catholic apparently). C4EM has only 5% labour MPs opposing. The list of Labour MPs opposing SSM on the Christian Concern website (
    http://www.christianconcern.com/sites/default/files/docs/mps_supporting_marriage.doc) are also different to the C4EM website.

    We all know Gordon Brown opposed SSM and he is on neither the C4EM list or the Christian Concern one.

    We may get equal marriage becuase of Lab’s support but we shouldn’t forget there’s quite a few nasty homophobes in each of the parties and we didn’t get SSM from a Labour govt.

  41. He isn’t a very religious man, he became a Catholic for the woman he left his wife for. It’s a disgrace that he should be allowed to vote with his personal religion not with the opinion of the people of Stoke South.

    1. I had no idea about that. It really deserved wide coverage. Sadly I’m not in the least surprised.

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 21 Jan 2013, 12:53pm

      If that’s true, someone should make noise about it, expose the bigot and the double standard.

    3. If he had sexual relations with the lady he left his wife for before they married what would that make him? The bible has plenty to say about that.

      1. Yes stoning would have been the norm according Leviticus

  42. The blame lies squarely at the leader’s door. This should be a whipped vote.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 21 Jan 2013, 12:56pm

      Absolutely, it was a huge mistake for Miliband and Clegg to cave in to a free vote. Bad move. This could actually fail now that more MPs are coming out of the woodwork to say NO, no thanks to those who refused to draw a line in the sand with the religious nutters who’ve been the loudest and the most determined to see it go down in flames. My confidence is waning by the day. Unless the votes are guaranteed to pass it, then it shouldn’t even be voted on until they are there.

  43. Mr Flello’s office said: “Rob is a major bigot and does not believe in equality for gay people.” Fixed.

  44. Well then, I’ll be voting against Rob Flello, the Labour Shadow Justice Minister and MP for Stoke-on-Trent South.

  45. Robert Fiello – Shadow Minister for Injustice – a BNP wolf in Labour sheep’s clothing?

  46. PeterinSydney 21 Jan 2013, 9:29am

    How could a person with responsibility for Justice be able to be so homophobic? It does nothing to develop any confidence in how this fellow would protect gay people in his important role. He could be quite dangerous in fact.

  47. Well, I hope that Ed Milliband will be removing him from his position rather quickly?

    “Rob is a very religious man and does not agree with same-sex marriage taking place within a church” Did he not listen to the proposals, they are not taking place in churches.

    This is another case of someone using his religion to hide his bigotry!

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 21 Jan 2013, 12:49pm

      He won’t do anything about it though will he? Miliband should never have caved in to a free vote and nor should Clegg. This legislation could fail by a narrow margin. It seems as if there are more MPs saying no almost on a daily basis. We seldom hear of more voting yes do we? The religious nutters are very loud and determined to make sure they get their way when the vote comes. I don’t trust the Out4Marriage campaign saying the majority will vote yes. Some of those they say are voting yes may suddenly change their mind at the last minute because of the vicious rhetoric coming from the right wing nutters in their respective constituencies. Our side has been very apathetic, complacent and hardly proactive. StonewallUK has more or less disappeared since the consultation began, not a word from Summerskill to counter the hatred and lies coming from C4M and their rabble and certainly nothing from MPs in support.

      1. That There Other David 21 Jan 2013, 1:04pm

        I don’t think there are more saying no than before. Those that were suspected of being anti-equality are declaring which way they will vote, and of course Pink News is naming those people so we know who they are.

        Meanwhile, I lobbied my MP and last week he confirmed to me in a letter that he’ll be supporting the proposals despite also getting lobbied by those against the changes. That, however, didn’t get reported on here.

  48. Another brain-washed, religious bigot. We HAVE to stop pandering to these people. Religion should have absolutely NO place in politics. Pro-gay marriage President Obama has today been re-inagurated in the US. That proves to me religion is losing its grip, even there in the land of the multi-million-dollar-earning TV evangelist. Organised religion is past its sell-by date. People don’t want or need its moralising. The world is a much happier place without it. So, why don’t you all just shut-the-f-up and disappear into history where you belong?

  49. Rob your a wanker

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