Reader comments · Tory MP David Burrowes accuses David Lammy of ‘playing the race card’ in equal marriage debate · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Tory MP David Burrowes accuses David Lammy of ‘playing the race card’ in equal marriage debate

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Every time Burrowes speaks he reveals himself to be even more of an awful person

    David Lammy compared bigots with bigots. Simple

    1. Chester666666 22 May 2013, 2:15pm

      Bigots never like it when they are told how bigoted they are, they don’t like facts either

    2. David Burrowes only said what he did because David Lammy’s speech was so powerful and persuasive. Very impressive.

  2. He just doesn’t get the point that was being made does he?

    Let me state it in simple terms for David Burrowes.

    Christians were against the abolition of slavery and they are now against same sex marriage. They were bigots then and they are bigots now!

    This is really not that difficult to comprehend is it? Did David Burrowes actually go to school?

    1. Jock S. Trap 22 May 2013, 2:41pm

      Let’s not forget also it was the same religious that treated women so appallingly from hanging them to denying them the vote through to work equality.

      At every point of improving Equality for all it is the religious that have always stood in the way of progress at every turn.

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 22 May 2013, 4:10pm

      They were also against the vote for women. The CoE was one of the biggest supporters of oppressing women’s suffrage.

      What really annoys me is their reaction to the term ‘bigot’. If you look at the Oxford dictionary, the definition reads as follows: ‘having or revealing an obstinate belief in the superiority of one’s own opinions and a prejudiced intolerance of the opinions of others.’ How can they deny that’s not their opinion or belief? It’s not as if we’re not telling the truth is it?

      We may have strongly held beliefs about equal marriage but we’re not telling them they should not worship and we’re not against their right to believe what they wish, but when it comes to denying a civil right because it offends their beliefs, then that’s where they step across the bigot line.

  3. GulliverUK 22 May 2013, 2:20pm

    David Lammy is stating historical fact. I’ve no idea what that idiot Burrows is talking about. Creationism I suspect, or some other made-up bull.

    I think it’s more like Burrows is placing the racist and homophobic cards.

    I would be proud to have David Lammy as my MP, although I have a fantastic Labour MP right now. If I had Burrows as an MP I’d simply move to a good constituency and away from this slime. How could any person who is gay expect fair unbiased impartial good assistance from Burrows?

    1. Jacob Dugan-Brause 22 May 2013, 4:04pm

      To anonymous called ‘GulliverUK. I should say I moved from Mr Burrowes constituency and now live with my husband in Steve Reed MP’s constituency in south London.

      This, after having met Burrowes in Winchmore Hill at a Quaker meeting where Friends discussed our support for marriage equality within our religious grounding. I won’t talk about what was said but I can say he came up to me afterward to extend an invitation to talk further.

      When I later asked to meet, I was no longer a constituent, and he cited Parliamentary boundary protocols to say no. He knew of my father being a Lutheran minister, of this liberal man of faith officiating at my marriage in 1979. He and I had a chance to be people, not adversaries.

      His subsequent dismissal was troubling, as our agreement was to meet for dialogue, not politics. It wasn’t to ‘debate’ (a lawyer’s folly), but to witness our lives and journeys together.

      My offer to dialogue still stands.

      1. GulliverUK 22 May 2013, 4:13pm

        I’m not really anonymous if you studied English Literature, and you’d probably find me reasonably quickly on twitter, and it was a nickname sometimes used at school — obviously without the “UK” !

        Some names on here are anonymous, like Jock S. Trap, but I wouldn’t want him / her to change that – it cracks me up every time I see it.

        He certainly comes across as slimy and odious, a wretched human being with zealot views. I would like to see him sent on a week long ‘diversity’ training course, to discover and meet other people and gain better inter-personal skills and insight in to the feelings of other people. Perhaps Mr Lammy and him could spend some time together and talk things through?

        1. Jacob Dugan-Brause 22 May 2013, 5:15pm

          Ah, but you would assume I’m clever, then. Let’s not.

          But I must thank you for the kind reply. Mr Burrowes is a criminal defence attorney and has a well-reasoned sense of free speech principles that are not at all based in religious orthodoxy, so he can surprise assumptions.

          Like all of us human beings, he has good points as well as bad. However, it might do him good to step outside his parish church and really talk with people unlike himself.

          That’s why I thought we were supposed to meet, to choose that possibility. I start from that point with him and welcome that meeting still.

          Good to chat even if one is supposed to throw insult at one another here. Just can’t quite get this stuff right, somehow.

        2. Don Harrison 23 May 2013, 11:46pm

          Well said that man

  4. he is offending not just me — that does not matter — but the majority of the black and minority ethnic communities who are opposed to the bill.

    Maybe Burrowes should let black and minority ethnic groups speak for themselves rather than appointing himself their spokesman.

    He really is a horrible little man. He should take the advice suggested by his surname and burrow into some hillside – permanently.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 22 May 2013, 3:01pm

      And I question Burrowes’ feigning concern about black people of religious belief? They never concede the ‘pain’ that supporters of the bill experience when they hear the spuriously mendacious nonsense when they traduce the marriage bill and gay people in the process. Obscene and disgusting that they cloak this in the name of religious freedom and tolerance. Freedom and tolerance for them only, to hell with the rest of us.

  5. Robert (Kettering) 22 May 2013, 2:25pm

    That Burroughs creep, along with others like Bone and Leigh, is just the sort of MP who would have indeed objected to the abolition of slavery so David Lammy is 100% spot on with his comments.

    Once a bigot always a bigot. A vile and thoroughly nasty individual is Burroughs.

  6. I watched David Lammy live on TV. What he said was spot on and brilliant. Sometimes you just have to tell them the way it is. The only one playing the ‘race card’ is David Burrowes. I e-mailed David Lammy and thanked him for what he said …. maybe others could do the same.

    1. David Lammy has been a brilliant advocate throughout the passage of this bill. His speeches have always been spot on and accurate. He is certainly a testament to how an MP should be and I wish that he was the MP for the area I live instead of the coward Simon Hughes.

  7. Jock S. Trap 22 May 2013, 2:38pm

    I did see this and I thought it was appalling the day Burrowes and Howarth treated David Lammy for what was an extremely important and relevant point.

    It actually shows up those nasty people for who they are that whilst dictating that the religious opinion must be heard and listen to ‘only’ as some kind of warped equality then dismisses David Lammy and put him down for expressing his own very emotional opinion.

    It showed them up for the utter hypocrites they are.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 22 May 2013, 2:56pm

      If I’d been David Lammy, I would have fired back and told him to stop playing the religion card, tit for tat that is equally offensive to some in the House, that the UK is NOT a theocracy. I’m sick of others deferring to these swivel eyed religious loons.

      Incidentally, I wonder how many of the praying away the marriage bill christian loons were outside Parliament. Does anyone have any numbers? Either way, they’re praying didn’t exactly yield any miracles last night did it?

      1. Jock S. Trap 22 May 2013, 4:53pm

        I noticed on the BBC they did show but from a low angle so you didn’t see how many were there.

        The Christian group claims estimated at 300. Somehow I doubt it was that figure. Even then, 300 is hardly something to be taken notice of considering they’d been promoting this gathering for a couple of weeks.

        It actually shows that they are a minority and the majority support this bill as we all knew.

        1. Robert in S. Kensington 22 May 2013, 10:03pm

          Jock, thanks for that. 300 is laughable, really. If there were hundreds of thousands as there were in France, then they would have some credibility but this is really a non-starter. In contrast to the French, it does prove one thing that we’re a lot more civilised about our differences even though we don’t agree with this lot of loons and a lot classier about it.

  8. Burrowed is an arse. David Lammy is right to equate the two subjects. They are both concerning human rights.

  9. Burrowes is a monster, and if he ever sets foot in Parliament again after his local area elections, I’ll eat a canoe.

  10. Midnighter 22 May 2013, 2:52pm

    Inconvenient facts are so … dratted inconvenent, aren’t they David?

    Demonstrating once again that bigots never let facts or logic get in the way of their hatred: if you can’t disprove your opponents argument, ignore it and generate a straw man argument.

  11. The comparison around slavery is only acceptable from a black person whose history is molded by such repugnant inhumanity to fellow man – and while we are talking about Christianity and Africa – Religions in the developing world have put back progress and evolution by decades –

  12. Some fools and idiots just never know when to keep their mouths shut rather than displaying their ignorance and foolishness for all too see. Many just thought he was a fool – now we KNOW!!!

  13. Burrowes is quickly demonstrating himself to be the nastiest thing in parliament. Objectionable on every conceivable ground. I can take a good guess at who the first Tory defector to UKIP will be.

    I’m not a fan of David Lammy in many ways, but on this issue he has been eloquent and excellent. Racism, sexism, homophobia and their apologism are all analogous and he is bang on to make that crystal clear.

  14. How dare burrows tell someone whose ancestry was were brutalised by slavery how to equate that injustice with modern day bigotry. Covert racism/overt homophobia.

  15. International Black Jamaican Squire 22 May 2013, 4:30pm

    Well said David, I am not a huge fan, however, I agree with the point you made. Its still the same, and the same way we look at the abolotion of slavery and wonder what all the fuss about, in a quicker time, we will look at gay marriage and wonder what all the fuss is about. I grew up in Jamaica and went to Law School in the UK and have always known, I would grow up, find a husband, get married, have kids and live happily ever after, I am single but its all still very possible.

  16. Jock S. Trap 22 May 2013, 5:22pm

    Not to say anything against people’s well-meaning beliefs, but religion has caused more wars, murders and persecution than any other reason in history, including money! ~ Tom R.

  17. david burrowes is just digging himself deeper and deeper into a very deep hole of vileness.

    David Lammy is right, in 200 years, people will look back at the bigots voting against our rights in the same light as we now look back at those 200 years ago that voted against black rights.

  18. People, like Burrowes are perfectly content with dealing in outright lies and half truths, but when faced with irrefutable facts, they suddenly cry foul. He has the choice of proving Lammy wrong or simply backing down. We have a saying, in the U.S. that goes, “fish, cut bait, or get off the damn boat”. Hmmm, I wonder if Borrowes knows how to swim?

  19. Julian Morrison 22 May 2013, 8:09pm

    Only racists use the concept of “playing the race card”.

    1. Of course they do. It’s the only way they can assert a nonexistent “superiority.

    2. Exactly. I’m sure he’s massively endeared himself to “the majority of the black and minority ethnic communities”, he claims to speak on behalf of. Cretin.

  20. David Burrowes exhibits most of the established profile of the self hating closeted gay man. His extreme religious positioning against all things to do with equality for LGBT persons is a key component of a deep need to conceal who he really is. How many like him have been ‘outed’ when clandestine extra-marital activities are exposed in the print or electronic media? His turn will come, it is only a matter of time I suspect. His particular interest in groups that claim to be able to chance sexual orientation are to my mind highly persuasive of a deeply self-homophobic individual.

    1. chance should be ‘change’ of course.

  21. Staircase2 23 May 2013, 1:34pm

    According to the article though, David Burrowes didn’t actually SAY that did he…

    Horrible though David Burrowes is, it would appear that Scott Roberts and Pink News is doing a disservice to the actual debate…

    Which is not good

  22. Staircase2 23 May 2013, 1:39pm

    Apologies to Scott Roberts and Pink News

    It DOES in fact quote David Burrowes saying that in the article

    Can I suggest Pink News instigates a way authors can delete their postings if necessary?

    Hopefully this new post here will balance out my error

    Apologies once again

    1. Did Burrowes say it or did somebody just accuse him of saying it?

      “Mr Burrowes, who was among 128 Tory MPs to vote against the third reading of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill, denied the claims.”

      What claims did he deny?

  23. David Burrowes showed us what a sad man he is.

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.