He shouldgo back to his burrow under a rock. Like where the worms live
I see David Burrowes makes no reference to the vile attacks on gay people by the Telegraph, Daily Mail, Catholic Herald etc, and this from supposed responsible journalists and editors.
And as for the readers comments in reply to these ‘articles’, in my view, many of these replies were criminal and certainly would fall foul of the Public Order Acts.
Then we have the attacks from the Pope, his Cardinals, COE clergy, Ugandan politicians….
Need we go on.
Poor Mr Burrowes, a few Queens bash him with our handbags and he thinks this is abuse!
Last Saturday, not for the first time, the Telegraph had to close down and remove an entire comment board beneath an equal-marriage story so bad and uncontrollable had the comments become.
Putting aside the constant references to faggots, perverts, arse-bandits, shit-stabbers, queers, shirt-lifters and linking homosexuality with paedophillia etc over the last few months one memorable and highly rated un-moderated comment proposed that in revenge for his support of equal marriage, Nick Clegg should be dragged into an alleyway and gang raped.
Burrows needs to look closer at the people whose will he is carrying out in Parliament. You judge a man by his friends.
Indeed it seems only those with religion are entitled to opinions. They certainly think they alone should be above the law in discriminatory, bigoted behaviour.
You’re a 200% right
The Internet has destroyed spelling and grammar.
That aside, does expressing a homophobic opinion mean that a person is a homophobe? Hmmm…
Benjamin Cohen, your reported answers are superb! Good for you, for answering him as you did.
How astounding that this obvious homophobe should be complaining that on this LGBT forum there is full awareness of his behaviour.
Mr. Burrowes’s speech during the debate last Tuesday was nauseating in hits transparent projection of homophobia.
Congratulations, PinkNews, on being recognised in the House of Commons committee as being a powerful organ of the LGBT community! That’s quite an achievement.
The likes of Mr. Burrowes appear to loath the fact that LGBT people have a voice, that we talk to one another, and that where see homophobia we name it, and we shame it! Or course, the likes of Mr. Burrowes would much prefer that PinkNews didn’t even exist!
The likes of Mr. Burrowes appear to LOATHE the fact . . .
Agreed – Benjamin Cohen was brilliant.
In my opinion David Burrowes was being mischievous when he referred to the alleged death threats he’d received. If he did get them he should do what everyone else should do in those circumstances – go to the police. He should not try to make political capital out of them, because it’s conceivable that the threats really came from someone on the same side as himself.
Indeed. It’s so easy to seek sympathy but crying “I’ve received death threats!” As you say, if it’s true, he should have gone to the police, and, of course, if it was true, you can bet your bottom dollar he would instantly have gone to the police! Someone like him wouldn’t miss a chance like that!
We don’t know he was lying. And, of course, he might have gone to the police as well. But for the reason I said, he should not have spoken about the threats in the House of Commons or to the (mainly homophobic) press
Do you not think that if this man had emails or letters to take to the police he would have brandished them in public, that he would certainly have mentioned the fact that he had been involved with the police over the matter? No, I maintain it’s a lie. So easy to say.
I suspect some of those emails are straight homophobes pretending to be gay, just like those ‘gays’ who allegedly signed the C4M petition ‘fomenting’ opposition. I agree with your comment, totally.
Exactly right. Obviously, the opposition has its shills patrolling Pink News lately and reporting back to to them to know what people are saying in this forum. Burrowes and his ilk don’t like it that we’re watching them, listening very attentively and taking note of their often vile comments. Too bad. Notice he wasn’t one of those Tory MPs last tuesday who decried the homophobic rants in Parliament before the vote? He just sat there and said nothing to condemn it. Not even a ‘hear hear’ in support of those who did. Burrowes silence gives credence to his homophobia.
Robert, it’s most informative to recall precisely what Burrowes said during the debate last week!
He’s proud of what he said! He’s posted his whole speech on his website! He was the one who dropped to the the tactic of mentioning the word “N*zi”, as in:
“It is intolerable, however, that as soon as Members of Parliament put their heads above the parapet and speak to the media, they are called “a homophobe”, “a Nazi”. . . ”
Quite right, Eddy!
For those puzzled by the word “foment” (often wrongly thought to be an incorrect spelling of ferment), one meaning of the word “foment” is as follows:
“To rouse or stir up (a person or his energies); to excite, irritate.”
(Oxford English Dictionary.)
Is he referring to the gasps of incredulity at the “merciless prism of equality” line?
People like David Borrowes appear to be living on a different planet.
I dare say that MPs who are for or anti same sex marriage – or who are trying to sit on the fence – get called all sorts of nasty things.
The key differenence is that virtually no-one gets vilified for being heterosexual. – and yet you’d be hard pushed to find a homosexual who hasn’t been made to feel – either explicitly or implictly that he or she was in some way inferior.
The question should have been turned around on Burrowes. Would he agree with the vile comments and innuendo coming from the opposition, in the media (Telegaph & Mail, come to mind) and the bile coming from the Catholic hierarchy? Christian nutters always playing the victim card. They can say what they want but we can’t give it back to them? I think not. Get real, Burrowes and stop denying that you are not homophobic, you are. The man makes my skin crawl everytime he opens his mouth, just like that harridan Sharon James today.
Exactly, The comments on these comments pages are coming from private citizens. Our opposition are making vile statements from a public platform. We are fighting back.
Yes, Call. You can bet they’re already mobilised in a vicious letter writing campaign to the Lords. We should be doing the same. I’ve no doubt the CoE and RCC will collectively launch a post card campaign targeting the upper chamber. StonewallUK and Out4Marriage should pay serious attention after that Telegraph article the other day claiming that more than half of the Tories and some Labour may rebel against the bill and delay it for two years or scuttle it altogether. Complacency and apathy will bring it about if we don’t become just as pro-active and vocal this time around which we weren’t prior to the vote last week.
Christians everywhere are losing their right to say what they like unchallenged. This is what they are terrified of.
People in huge numbers are now just calling them the bigots they have always been.
Their answer to this? To play the victim card which they and other religious groups have used throughout history to garner support and strengthen their troops.
We have seen this even with the pope and his minions claiming they are being persecuted. Well they should recognise persecution that’s for sure. They invented it.
Benjamin Cohen taking a leaf out of Jesus’s book. :)
What a pathetic, self-obsessed excuse for a man.
I should add that Burrows is a grown man whingeing on about being quite fairly called a bigot whilst it’s young teenagers who are committing suicide because of the things he says.
He needs to look at himself in the mirror and see the sheer ugly looking back.
This type of response only proves Mr Burrowes point.
Wanting to deny someone equality, claiming that a section of society deserves to be treated as second class citizens for no other reason than they don’t fit your ideal, that’s NOT bigotry? How about claiming that the love shared between two consenting adults is the equivalent of raping a child or an animal? The victim card is overplayed by these people.
it is clear that mr burrowes lacks basic intelectual ability to understand simple concept of equalty and homophobia.
Is he a homophobe? Probably?
Is he a smarmy, intellectually sloppy, smug, over-confident shit who needs taking down a peg or two? Yes.
It would be hilarious,if not for the damage the anti-gay spokespeople do with their bigotry and Ignorance.They are the first to claim free speech and the right to say what they will no matter how vile and disgusting. However when someone speaks up against this homophobia and bigotry.They are the first to cry foul.They can dish it out but they cannot take it.This goes exactly to their Idea that they are superior and their views on the subject of same sex marriage are the only true views that count. and anything else is false.and depraved. It is very easy to see whos views are depraved. By the vile comments that are issued from the anti gay side of the argument from religion to boy scouts to some members of the government. It is disgusting how low they can go with their bigotry.
I can’t get my head around an out-n-out homophobe, feeling offended over being called out as a homophobe!
He really needs to join the real world.
The problem with David Burrows and his anti-same-sex-marriage chums is that their opposition is turning into one great big massive drone of nonsensical surreal codswallop dragged in from some alternative reality. It like watching a contortionist buckling himself out of all recognition until he ends up resuscitating himself with his own arse.
Oh, and Ben, you were great.
DAmn near got a hernia about “resusitating himself with his own ass>
No wonder his words stink.
Pathetic. If anybody suggested closing down CiF or the user comments on the Telegraph or Daily Mail for the sheer volume of hate speech on there (am I wrong?), the likes of Burrowes would scream blue murder.
Burrowes on Twitter btw. ;-)
Mr Burrowes and others who do not agree with marriage equality have their freedom of conscience to feel that they cannot reconcile themselves to the prospect of same-same marriage. They have their freedom of speech to declare their opposition, even in Parliament as Mr Burrowes can and also in often very insulting and offensive terms. Yet, he appears to be also unable to reconcile himself to the fact that we, contributors to PinkNews, also have freedom of speech to declare our opposition to the views of those campaigning against same-sex marriage, especially those in Parliament.
Freedom of Conscience and Freedom of Speech are not for the sole benefit of people who enjoy a privileged position in society in terms of rights and yet don’t mind being abusive, or worse, towards sections of society who do not have equal rights. I’m referring to the many heterosexuals who enjoy a superior position in society, simply because of their sexuality – (cont’d) >
… yet want to prevent gay people from having the same rights and quality of life, if a life at all, simply because of our sexuality. Having witnessed much bigotry, some extreme, on the internet against gay people, I realised that those who declare that they have the Freedom of Speech to be abusive towards gay people get very offended themselves if we dare challenge their bigotry.
Mr Burrowes appears to be offended by comments challenging the MPs who are against same-sex marriage, to the extent that he feels compelled to make ridiculous and untrue comments about PinkNews. His defensiveness suggests that his conscience may be somewhat troubled in his opposition to same-sex marriage. If he has a clear conscience he wouldn’t feel so offended or threatened by comments on PinkNews.
I wouldn’t mind betting his conscience might be wrestling with his own sexuality. Deeply closeted gay people are often the most vocal against equality.
Does he say anything at all about the Anglican Mainstream website?
I bet NOT-and yet its total homophobia.
perhaps Benjamin should have repeated some of the vile comparisons to peadophillia and beastiality that these anti campaigners have centered their whole argument around and shown their hostility.
I think Burrows is a lying homophobic religious phoney, putting it simply in my book he is a prick. He wanted to be the poster boy for all the other religous homopobic phonies and he has got his wish come true. Of course he spits his dummy out when anyone points out that he is a delusional homophobic prick because the truth is the truth.
David Burrowes is the Parliamentary Chairman of the Conservative Christian Fellowship.
Not all Conservatives are bigots and not all Christians are bigots, but Conservative Christians do have a tendency to be bigots.
According to his Wikipedia profile, he blamed liberal thinking for society’s ‘sliding values’.
Although his children have nothing whatsoever to do with this, I can’t help remarking that one of his children, according to Wikipedia, is named Dorothy. I wonder if he refers to her male friends as the “friends of Dorothy”.
“Parliamentary Chairman of the Conservative Christian Fellowship” !!
Ah, well, that says it all! The man’s head is full of religions gobbledegook and mumbo-jumbo. That’s his motivation. A lot of old doctrinal brainwashing. Poor man. He could be free, and happy!
Maybe this experience will eventually lead him to see the REAL light and see that all that god stuff for the nonsense it is.
Is it so bemusing to this man that gay people and people who care about us may be naturally hostile to him?
And does he not realise that protesting a bigot is not abuse? Of course not, homophobes!
“I’m not anti-David Burrowes. I just don’t think he should have the same rights as everyone else.”
No? It’s the same thing, Mr Burrowes.
With the protection given to the C of E and other religions, the only reason for opposing the enactment equal civil marriage must be because you simply don’t think we’re as good as you.
(And note I said ‘enactment’ there. Burrowes is entitled to his beliefs about marriage but he’s not entitled to deprive LGBt people of rights)
Exactly, Iris. I listened to part of the committee discusion earlier today. I was particulary struck that the professor from the University of Bristol, although in opposition to equal marriage, when asked if he thought the current bill is water-tight to protect religious denominations from being forced to participate in marriage ceremonies for gay couples, conceded that it was virtually water-tight with one or two minor issues that could be addressed simply and that ECHR intervention wouldn’t arise. I don’t think that’s something Burrowes and his ilk welcomed, especially the likes of Sharon James and Colin Hart.
F\/ck religious freedoms.
These goons want enshrined in law a right to discriminate based on whichever fairy story they happen to believe in.
Enough is enough.
Foment is a perfectly valid word, as is “witchhunt”, which is something PN has been blatantly engaged in ever since the same-sex marriage bill was announced.
MPs are free to vote with their conscience when not bullied into submission by the party whip, and it does not make them bigots per se if they do not vote the way many on here would like them to.
That is akin to the “racist” slur being used to smear and shout down anyone daring to suggest that immigration is nearing a tipping point.
A devious and underhand tactic in other words.
So voting for bigoted policies because one believes them to be right doesn’t make one a bigot eh?
It is the very quintessence of bigotry to espouse discriminatory double standards. Face it, there is absolutely no way one can support homophobic legislation in good conscience without being a homophobe oneself.
Also, “witch hunt” is two words, not one…
So by your deduction, blaming Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus Christ but supporting their right to practice their faith freely doesn’t make one anti-semitic or foments anti-semitism?
My very existence of what I was born as is NOT up to a religious conscience debate.
How dare they assume they have the right to deny me civil rights based upon their idiotic beliefs.
to Burrowes – go take a bottle of pills you worthless arse
Samuel B, I have supported a few of your strong beliefs with regard to the ineffectiveness of the Terrence Higgins Trust’s so-called prevention campaigns. However, having recently observed that you “authoritatively” advised a friend of yours to not trust the result of HIV tests conducted by medical professionals in the UK but to seek a test in another country, and now having observed, above, your support for those MPs who are fighting tooth and nail against Equal Marriage for reasons which are transparently homophobic, I can only conclude that you have a considerable degree of contrariness in your character, that for reasons either best known to yourself or possibly even unknown to yourself you choose to take the contrary and unpopular view regardless of it being incorrect.
it’s not called the Pink Der Stürmer for nothing with it’s Anti-catholic messages and Rome-o-phobia
There you go again with your moronic Catholic ‘logic’, Ray: ‘Nazis criticised Catholics, therefore anyone who criticised Catholics is a Nazi’ has the same logical form as ‘Catholic priests abused children, therefore anyone who abused children was a Catholic priest’….We know that’s not true – Sir Jimmy Savile was just a Papal Knight, not a priest, for instance……Did you acquire your thinking ‘abilities’ in a Catholic school, by any chance, along with your homophobia and murderous views on contraception? The difference between the Nazi propaganda against Catholics and LGBT criticism of Catholic bigotry, is that the former was false and the latter is true. The difference between Nazi propaganda against Catholics and Catholic claims that equal marriage is an ‘abberration’ comparable to abortion and slavery?…er…not so much….
Cry me a river.
How come our side can’t have someone angry and confrontational like Margaret Thatcher? Someone who isn’t afraid to call a pig a pig? Not saying that she was good, but at least she spoke her mind. I just wish someone would say to him “Aw. A bigot getting upset for being called a bigot. Poor thing”.
In the words of Howard Stern and co: “WAAAHHHH!”. Cry me a river.
I agree, I also wish a few supportive MPs would take these idiots on and challenge their specious and spurious comments. They just can’t take it when we give it right back to them. They think because they are religious that nobody has the right to say anything nasty about or to them. Tough titty I say, deal with it, Burrowes. Why should his religious beliefs take precedence over legislation affecting only the lives of LGBT people. His marriage won’t be affected nor anybody else’s. Straights will continue to marry regardless.
Margaret Thatcher didn’t strike me as angry or confrontational, she struck me as cold and uncompromising, in all the worst possible ways. An appalling role model in my opinion.
What we need is more people like Peter Tatchell, people who stand up bravely for the rights of others based on their humanity, compassion and sense of justice.
Abuse is it. Mr Burrows.
We are all very qualified in dealing with abuse on this forum.
Denying tax paying people basic civil rights is abuse.
Using religion to prevent people basic civil rights is abuse.
“Hostility” against opponents is it.
Try 47 years of being crapped on by people like you.
PS. Please have a major illness in the Hospital I consult for.
I will treat you equally. Unlike you do for others.
And whilst I’m on a rant, perhaps your idiotic religion failed to notice the infallible pope of the catholic persuasion ended up very fallible indeed.
Grow a set and stop hiding behind your bloody bible.
Oh, poor Mr Burrows; you feel abused? Try the experience of being abused for your whole life, for something you had no choice over whatsoever, such as your sexuality. THEN complain about it. And, yes, you are a homophobe. Deal with it.
The Tory party have ‘formented’ abuse of LGBT since the beginning of their party – Cameron’s leadership is the first time they’ve not attempted to make society hate us.
It’s pathetic how a bigot with power uses the victim card to make out he’s the abused like this MP that said these things. Just sad and pathetic. Transparent and evil. Or just plain stupid.
It doesn’t need PinkNews reporting on Burrowes to influence my view that he is indeed at the very least a bigot and very probably an homophobe, too, however much he may cavil at being classified as such. His comments about homosexuals are offensive and if he does not like me making observations about his comments on homosexuality and equal marriage, then either he should stop making them or accept that my comments are the price he must pay for the freedom of speech which we both enjoy. Incidentally, I defend his right to say what he thinks – after all it gives the public (and his constituents) a clearer idea of his views.
Oh… so Mr Burrowes. You view PN then? Do you do this in your own time or when at work? if its the latter, then I hope you are subjected to your workplace policy which deals with misuse of the internet.
I watched much of the committee meeting debate on parliament TV and Mr Burrowes was mostly absent on most of the people’s evidence wheras people like Chris Bryant and in fact most of the others were there thru the whole debate ie 8 am until 5pm.
Mr Burrowes it seems has come to a pre-judged opinion on SSM, he thinks he doesn’t have to hear the evidence in the committee meeting and then only decides to attend the meeting to have a dig at chosen people and groups like PN that he dislikes.
What is the point of having him on the committee if most of the time he is absent and has a closed mind on the bill ie he has a bigotted view on the bill from the very start.
Totally agree with that. I’m all for fair play and hearing opposing views but these people have no intention of supporting equal marriage after voting against it, they don’t like it, they don’t want it. If I were so opposed, I wouldn’t even bother attending, although I suspect it makes it easier to justify equal marriage legislation knowing that opposing views were allowed time to comment and weren’t shut out giving them ammunition; but what on earth could they possibly bring to the table. Do they really think they’re going to derail it. I think Burrowes and his ilk need a reality check.
He should follow the arch bigot Pope Benedict into retirement and leave politics.
Wonder what David Burrowes thinks about the Catholic teaching that homosexuality is a “tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil.”
Has he objected? I doubt it. He probably doesn’t even class it as homophobia.
This man does not represent my views as his constituent.
Well, at least the electorate will know what they getting next time round.
Is Burrowes a homophobe? is the pope a senile old fool unfit to hold office?….
Given that the job description for “Pope” essentially is “senile old fool”…
So Mr Burrowes, let me get this straight (pun not intended), you feel you have some God-given right to spit words of venom at the gay community and expect them to not take offense or retaliate? Wow. You really are the epitome of an ignoramus, and furthermore, it is an embarrassment to know that you actually have a say in legislature! What a joke!
There will always be some personal comments on a reader’s forum that overstep the mark. You just need to look at some of the comments left on the Daily Mail and Telegraph in response to their articles on Gay issues to see that. The only difference between DM and Telegraph readers’ comments and those on PinkNews is that the former is shielded under the fallacy of being the ‘moral majority’. Being a over an over 50 suburban Middle Englander doesn’t stop you inciting hatred and prejudice.
If he can’t stand the heat…….
It’s nauseating even reading about these hypocritical homophobic bigots. He gives a very bad impression of enfield/southgate, another place to avoid.
David Burrowes it is my opinion that you and your ilk are nothing but hateful homophobes. I have based that assertion on the hateful and bigoted rhetoric espoused and disseminated by you and people like you. To not agree with something due to your lack of education and displaced religious belief is one thing. To actively deny equality to a segment of society who do not share that belief is plain old fashioned bigotry!
Fine with me, and most people, if he thinks marriage is between a man and a woman, but he should not ignore the fact that others may differ. There’s no rational reason to be against equal marriage; all the opponents come up with is basically: it’s always been our way and we want to abide by this tradition. You may not be a homophobe if you think so, but behind the times is what you definitely are.
What absolute rubbish.
What PinkNews does do UNLIKE most religious sites is give people a way of debating what they think to others.
Mr Burrowes that’s called democracy. Nowhere have I seen abuse but personal opinion which unlike most Marriage Equality opponents isn’t offensive and bigoted toward how people are born.
Remember Religion is a choice. Being Gay is not.
Well….. When you try to block one demographics equality, people can and will see it as abuse. tbh, I think they hit the nail on the head, it IS abuse
It would be a great idea for Pink News to invite David Burrowes to write a comment piece in which he can explain his thinking on marriage and about how Pink News has been treating him unreasonably.
Under all the circumstances it might be appropriate to disallow reader comments though, of course, Pink News might want to respond in a separate follow-up article.
((apologies if double posted)) Well….. when you block one demographics right to equality, it IS abuse. Tbh i think they hit the nail right on the head with this one
I think somebody isn’t feeling loved and needs a (((hug)))
Job well done then pinknews xxxx
Oh for goodness sake, enough beating around the bush. Mr Burrowes, you are homophobic. What you do, defines you. No, there is not any space to insert a fig-leaf between homophobia and “no marriage for gays”.
He was the one who pushed for amending to the law to remove Section 5 of the Public Order Act, he can’t now complain that people who don’t like him say so online. Tough sh1t – this is what you voted for. But this is what we have had to put up with day in, day out, week in, week out, year in, year out, decade in, decade out … because the law doesn’t properly regulate and control homophobic hate when the individual claims they’re a Christian. Apparently it’s ok for them to be homophobic haters in public.
Christians should never elect me as PM because I’d end that before the sun had set on my first day in office.
Cohen should have replied to Burrowes that he is homophobic. Opposing equal rights for gays is the definition of homophobia.
He is correct, PInk News comment boxes are filled with angry comments. The whole site is based on attack and calling people homophobes who disagree with their views. I never read a website comms box that is so filled with anger and name calling. This is one scary site.