Reader comments · Tory MP Sir Gerald Howarth defends ‘aggressive homosexual community’ equal marriage slur · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Tory MP Sir Gerald Howarth defends ‘aggressive homosexual community’ equal marriage slur

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. And yet the idiot still does not want to confirm what he actually means.

    He is a complete and utter tool!

    1. If a man has swivelling eyes and sounds like a loon . . .

      What can we conclude?

  2. A “stepping stone” to what?

    I have no idea. Nor, it seems, does he.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 23 May 2013, 1:28pm

      The slippery slope! Fictitious people demanding incestuous and polygamous marriages but he has yet to provide the evidence and the demand for both.

      1. Chris Ashford and Peter Tatchell are examples he has given.

      2. You mean Norman Tebbit is just a figment of my deranged imagination? Thank the gods for that!

    2. Cardinal Fang 23 May 2013, 2:23pm

      His remarks sound just like blatant demonising of gay people. Which is part of the religious agenda of certain groups.

      1. That There Other David 23 May 2013, 4:05pm

        Rather handily he lists some of them out for us. What a lovely gesture :-)

  3. Guy Lambert 23 May 2013, 11:22am

    Poor Sir Gerald Howarth. Must be awful facing that aggressive gay lobby when you’re used to dealing with all the really lovely ones like the arms, pharmaceutical and oil lobbies

  4. Has any one asked him what further changes the gay community has in view?

  5. The swiveling eyes make it hard for him to concentrate to make a rational point…

  6. “As far as I’m aware I have had no words of opposition from constituents over the last couple of days.” He is a liar and a nasty bigot.

  7. What about the views of the Quackers, the Unitarians, the liberal jews? are they less valuable than those of the other faiths he quotes? in any case this is CIVIL marriage. nothing to do with religion.

    and what this bill is suppsed to be a stepping stone towards exactly?

    1. i think you meant the Quakers. We already know the views of the Quackers, led by Howarth

      1. Think I would join a sect called the Quackers! Sound like a fun group of guys! :D

  8. Typical homophobe – he is fear-mongering that there’s a slippery slope and it only shows how pathetic he is

  9. “Are we going to be accused of a hate crime?”

    Only if you continue to show hatred, Gerald. Your move.

  10. … and, of course, there’s NEVER EVER been any “aggressive ANTI-homosexual community”, has there? But wait … what exactly is RELIGION if it’s not an “aggressive anti-homosexual community”? What these dinosaurs hate is opposition. Well, tough. We’ve had enough of bigots – especially religious ones.

  11. A bigot defends his bigotry by saying some of his constituents are bigots.

  12. This disgrace we employ this moron as a MP – are there not gay people in Aldershot what use would he be in representing them with such primitive views.

    The world is a different place he would never say this but I guess he would not accept black and white people marrying either.

  13. A stepping stone towards our world domination plot, of course. How morons like this are EVER allowed to hold any office beggars belief. This is why the general population has very legitimate grounds for actively distrusting politicians, whatever their political colours. Because the democratic system is a self-regulated factory for career politicians who make sure they can hold their job with no risk of having to explain themselves, justify their actions or declarations, assured of a cushy job with obscene privileges attached.

  14. Emily Dodge 23 May 2013, 12:01pm

    I have emailed him asking for an explanation of his comments but still haven’t had any answers. I have told him I won’t go away and will continue to press for answers. He (one of his team) is trying to fob me off. The first reply asked if I was a constituent which I questioned to be told constituents take priority. I don’t see his latest comments as defensive more just reiteration of what he has already said.

    1. Good for you. Don’t give up!!

  15. Sister Mary Clarence 23 May 2013, 12:13pm

    Its quite exciting isn’t is …. I’ve got goosebumps. I haven’t been so excited since PG bought out those pyramid tea bags.

    What can it be?

    Equal marriage …. then ….. time travel? Or maybe a Stargate uncovered on Hampstead Heath?

    I hope its equal marriage and then some ‘aggressive homosexual’, face down in the mud getting taken from behind on the Heath bangs their head on what they think is a tree root, only to find its a lost Stargate. I am pisssing myself with excitement.

    I can see it now wandering through a Rhododendron bush on the Heath one minute and popping out the other end suddenly on the dunes in Gran Canaria, or in a dark room in Berlin.

    I am literally pisssing myself with excitement.

    We’ll have to keep the straights away from it though, they’ll only use it for wars and stuff. It should be kept for special things only though – sex and shopping

    1. That There Other David 23 May 2013, 4:11pm

      Personally I’m already building a black hole generator to suck in the ENTIRE EARTH!!! MWAHAHAHAH!!

      Haven’t quite worked out how we escape the destruction yet, but I’m working on it. It’ll be an aggressive method though, that’s for sure. Keeping up the aggression is very important.

      1. Sister Mary Clarence 23 May 2013, 4:23pm

        When I was building my Death Star in the shed to finish off some b’stard who spilled my drink in the Two Brewers I found that often the simplest solutions did the trick. Try taking it back to basics.

        There’s not much you can’t solve by closing your eyes and making a wish.

        It it doesn’t work first time try burning a bit of incense, or even better, spraying a bit of Kouros around the room. That’ll do it every time.

        Obviously no half measures though – spray it round aggressively.

        1. You almost made me choke on my drink! :D

  16. Because you fool of a man – Religion and Government in the UK are not linked – any more than Santa or the Easter Bunny have any sway on the social changes we embark on – EVOLVE!

  17. From the Mail;

    I definitely support gay marriage but I do think that some (not all) of the people opposed to it are not especially homophobic or bigoted, just of a different generation where marriage was always, unquestionably between a man and a woman.
    – Charlotte, Derby, 22/5/2013 12:34
    Click to rate     Rating   135

    A rather fair and diplomatic comment I think, she’s shown that she is prepared to listen to the opposing side and understands where they are coming from, but even so it’s 135 in the red. 
    Even when you try to communicate with these people it’s not enough, they just won’t listen and diplomacy doesn’t work with them. It’s really sad and I think that Gerald Howarth is the same, I’m a forgiving person but I do think that some people are beyond help.

  18. Good thing sheet for brains was not around when abolition of slavery and women’s suffrage were the it thing… I am sure he would have been vomiting out this sort of total rubbish then as well.

    My god, how do these backwards fools end up ruining, ahem, I mean running our countries…? How do we, the voters do this? God, how sad.

    Morons as MPs and members of congress, as prime ministers and kings and presidents.

    1. Midnighter 23 May 2013, 2:21pm

      Because sheet floats.

      It is a self-selecting group: they are the ones that put themselves forwards on the road to power and influence. I venture that the personalities and motivations of a great many of these people are inclined more towards self aggrandisement than to genuine public service. The ‘choice’ society is left with is skewed from the start.

      You see this within corporations – exemplified by all the stories of incompetent management leading to financial ruin in recent years. In my experience a lot of these ‘leaders’ are nothing more than talented self-publicists with excellent ‘networking’ skills.

  19. Swivel eyed loon alert!

  20. Oww do be quiet Gerald otherwise i may have to hit you with my pink feather duster. Now do settle down my dear.

  21. keith francis farrell 23 May 2013, 12:33pm

    “The Church of England was and is opposed to the bill, as is the Roman Catholic Church and the Muslim clergy, but their views counted for nothing.”
    well the last time I looked the Muslim,s are very anti gay and would not hesitate to kill us. The Catholic church has always protected their priests who have molested children, plus their last cardinal is giulty of have gay sex. dont know about the c of E, but I suspect they have many queens hiden in their ranks.
    People need to understand this is about equality. no one wants to fear being asulted just because of who they love. People who do that in the name of their religion are evil.
    I would like to know why do we need to put up with the hate people like this idiot are saying.
    he needs to learn to engage his brain befor he opens his mouth.

  22. ““It is very important to understand I was not speaking off the top of my head…there are concerns among many of us who take the traditional view on marriage that we will be victimised.”

    Cr*p. You WERE speaking off the top of your head. You were just reiterating the garbage spouted by some right wing fundies about the ‘homosexual agenda’.

    And you’re worried about being victimised? What, like all the Catholic and C of E churches are ‘victimised’ for not re-marrying divorcees? Yes, we see that every day, don’t we? Not.

    Howarth’s explanation is no explanation at all, and his bigotry shines through. Female suffrage was a “big social change” so I guess Howarth thinks that’s a bad thing too then?

    He can’t defend his views because they’re not logical and are only based on prejudice.

  23. I’ll say what I think a lot of people on here know to be true.

    There’s an ultra left-wing element of gay radicals who, in laudably fighting for just equality for gay people, are nonetheless untethered and won’t know at what point their work will be done – ie. when equality & parity has been achieved in all areas of public life – because they have only known how to fight for the right of people to live however, and do whatever, they choose.

    At some point their demands will start breaking through moral codes and boundaries that are accepted as essential to a stable and cohesive society by most gay people.

    We saw an example of this mindset in yesterday’s PN debate on barebacking sauna parties:- the laissez-faire response was as shocking as it was telling.

    If we’ve no regard for the health or safety of ourselves and others then where do we draw the line?

    When gay marriage is enshrined in law, what excuse then that many of us still insist of behaving with hedonistic abandon?

    1. Here’s an example of what I mean by pointing to moral codes within the mainstream community, and how influential heterosexuals are now daring to suggest that paedophiles should be allowed to work near children and the age of sexual consent should be reduced to 13 in light of recent prosecutions against old celebrities.

      Sharply defined moral codes and standards are required in civilised societies to protect us as much from ourselves and others, but ultra-left wing progressives have sought to blur those boundaries and abandon personal responsibility in a push for a “Do as you please and sod everyone else” attitude to life.

      Such a mindset is sociopathic as it encourages absence of empathy and people putting selfish motivations over and above the need to do the right thing, and that’s when society starts to break down, as indeed it’s doing as exemplified by the me-me-me culture.

      A society without clearly defined codes and standards of behaviour is a sane person’s idea of hell.

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 23 May 2013, 1:35pm

        The same can apply to heterosexuals who commit adultery which is all about sex and not influenced by that ultra left wing nonsense you’re spewing. Who is responsible for their marriages breaking down? It’s been going on for decades, long before equal marriage were even on the radar. Get real.

        As for bare-backing in saunas, so by your deduction, the majority of us are supporting it? What about the heterosexuals who solicit the services of prostitutes and not using protection? You’re as bad as the religious loons who don’t represent the majority of decent religious people.

        1. This isn’t about comparing our lifestyle with heterosexuals because, as I point out, the blurring of moral boundaries is all encompassing and non-discriminating.

          We’ve long used inequality as our excuse that being treated as third class citizens of society pushes many of us into wantonly self-destructive behaviours, and to a degree that argument is/was valid.

          But where’s the debate among us today – as people with near full equality – to determine how to empower gay culture to find more meaningful and less destructive ways of functioning?

          Yes, straights elicit the services of prostitutes, and so do gay men:- but what is it about a number of us that are willing to go further, much further, for extreme decadent thrills?

          An extreme example:- in London of any weekend there’s untold sex parties/orgies in which participants inject with all manner of drugs, and even their own blood to stay high.

          How many more ODs/deaths at these events before we address the elephant in the room?

      2. Midnighter 23 May 2013, 1:51pm

        At risk of being accused of being “ultra left-wing element ” – if a minority wish to participate in bareback sauna parties, its none of your business. Conversely, there are laws to protect you from being forced into any form of sex you don’t agree to, so your rights are not affected.

        “Sharply defined moral codes and standards” defined by whom?

        A society who imposes “clearly defined codes and standards of behaviour” is not synonymous with standards you happen to agree with, or would you welcome Sharia law replace those of the UK?

        I agree, it should never be “Do as you please and sod everyone else” – but I don’t see why it can’t be ” “Do as you please as long as it harms no one else”

        1. I agree with the “so long as it harms no one else” principle, Midnighter.

          But every civilised society has a duty to protect the well being and rights of those who are vulnerable and weak willed and lack the requisite faculties and thought processes or are simply less able than others to always make the decisions that best serve their well being.

          In no way am I cheerleading the nanny state or Sharia Law here, but there are certain avenues of gay culture that are basically cul de sacs of hopelessness and inherently and helplessly soul-destroying, yet are dressed up, glamorised and pushed on naive youngsters as something they are not.

          Matthew Todd of Attitude got the discussion going in The Guardian a few months back (Google “The roots of gay shame”), but it is damning how quickly his thoughtful polemic was throttled by the leftie hand-wringers who similarly jumped on him for wanting to “spoil our fun”.

          So where, ultimately, does this fun end, and to what extreme does it lead?

          1. As always Samuel you are not prepared to do anything about the issues you raise. It is all very well spending your time bleating about things, but you want everyone else to do the work for you.

            The RVT in Vauxhall recently held a community meeting about HIV & sexualised drug culture, were you there?

            GMFA have been holding focus groups to gain community insight into how they can best formulate their services in the future – have you attended?

            You sneer at my use of Twitter, but as a networking device it is extremely useful. You & Mathew Todd are the same ilk, all talk, no action! Get off your backsides & do something for a change!

            When the film “How to Survive a Plague” opens for general release in September go & see it, you will see what activism can achieve. I guess in your view activists are just #aggressivehomosexuals!

          2. Midnighter 23 May 2013, 5:01pm

            I do see your point in very general terms Sam; I wouldn’t want to see gay kids think they had to follow any particular stereotype or lifestyle particularly where it may be self destructive.

            The issue remains around the assumption that society can fairly determine those whose sub-par thought process need your corrective guidance (for their own good, of course): it sounds horribly Orwellian to me, never mind the Nanny State.

            On that note, rather than imposing more ‘moral codes’ there is an argument that if our society were less inhibited about sex, people would not be so readily driven to hide their activities in seedy environments. The implication that a lack of restriction leads via the slippery slope fallacy to some unspecified extreme is countered by examples such as the Catholic and Anglican churches where a very strict prohibition on sex coincides with their depraved record over child abuse.

  24. “ words of opposition from constituents ”
    Well well well, what a surprise that must have been, that the very people who voted for this arsehole might have agreed with his absolutely ridiculous comments.

    1. By no means all his constituents voted for him.

  25. There is no ‘aggresive homosexual community’, the matter is the LGBT community in latter times have been refused service in a pub, shop, hotel, the list goes on, and I come from a time when I would be put in prison for merely talking with another homosexual, the Police were very ambitious in tracking down homosexuals and beating them up before their appearance in the courts. So, we have always begged for Equality and in recent times the law has changed to allow free association, services and civil partnerships which amounted to legal rights within England and Wales, but not recognised anywhere else in the world. Gerald Howarth , however thinks we are aggresive in our fight for equal marriage, perhaps he should place himself in our position and realise that we all should be Equal before the law.

  26. Mumbo Jumbo 23 May 2013, 1:23pm

    “The Church of England was and is opposed to the bill, as is the Roman Catholic Church and the Muslim clergy, but their views counted for nothing.”

    We are talking about civil marriage. Why should they count for anything?

  27. Gerald Howarth, a proud member of the Nasty Party…

  28. OMG it's a slippery slope!!! 23 May 2013, 2:26pm

    Omg another one!! Cunningly disguised!!

  29. Like all persecutors, Howarth fears the wrath of his victims. Of course he is right that some who identifies as straight can be abused by someone who identifies as gay, but, if he could just accept that ALL prejudice is wrong ALL abuse of another’s basic human rights and dignities is wrong, he would have a much more powerful and consistent platform, not just for addressing his own fears but, for addressing the concerns of all citizens. That should be what he considers his duty as an MP and as a human being.

  30. john lyttle 23 May 2013, 2:35pm

    Sad old tosser, soon to be dumped in the dustbin of history along with a great many others. Hence the howling as their power fades and their bigotry is increasingly called out and laughed at

  31. Barry William Teske 23 May 2013, 2:45pm

    I do not see what Former Conservative defence minister Sir Gerald Howarth’s problem is here. There are plenty in the aggressive heterosexual community who see [unequal marriage] as but a stepping stone to something even further. And as a former defence minister he is sure to have used inequality as a way of furthering defensive goals, just as he is attempting to do so now.

  32. George Broadhead 23 May 2013, 2:46pm

    “The Church of England was and is opposed to the bill, as is the Roman Catholic Church and the Muslim clergy, but their views counted for nothing.”

    I only this were true.

  33. Garry Cassell 23 May 2013, 3:11pm

    “Sir” poophead, you are too stupid to know if there are any opposition to your comments…you seem to think that you are God and everyone is under your command…What a really stupid dork you are?????Find a cave somewhere and hide until you perish…

  34. Makes you wonder the number of CRANKS there are in our parliament

  35. “It is very important to understand I was not speaking off the top of my head” :-
    More like talking out of your arse!

  36. No, the gay community is not inherently aggressive.

    But the extremist element that shouts loudest and professes to speak for the rest of us while comprising probably no more than 1% of our numberd most certainly is, and I have no doubt that it is they whom MP Howarth is referring to.

    And to deny that just makes the rest of us look extremely foolish and prepared to railroad, stymie and stifle reasonable debate come what may.

    1. Every section of society has its extreme elements, its cranky elements, even its nasty elements.
      The trick is to deal with them without resorting to ad hominem insults like “aggressive”, “lefties” or “swivel-eyed loons”.

  37. That There Other David 23 May 2013, 4:15pm

    I find it incredible that he lists out three groups of people, namely the CoE, the RCC, and the Muslim Community, that are currently all embroiled in paedophile and sex-abuse scandals.

    And yet we’re supposedly the bad guys…

    1. What’s the CoE scandal?

  38. If his approach to change and progress had always obtained we would still be living in some sort of serfdom, assuming of course that we had managed to reach serfdom.

  39. Well as one of his constituents, he has certainly received email from me opposing his view. If telling your MP that you disagree with his position – and why is aggressive, so be it, but I was polite and stuck to the point. As for some of the posts here, ad hominem responses are not going to get anyone anywhere. Reasoned argument just might – even with Sir Gerald Howarth.

  40. A stepping stone to go further.. Hey guys and gals… Anyone for taking over the world? I am game! LOLOL!
    This guy though.. His Brian’s deep fried!!!!

  41. Howard Hyman 24 May 2013, 9:56am

    Is he an agent for the Westboro’ Baptist Church?

  42. All these comments are fair but if what Howarth says is true – that he has received many letters/emails from his contituents supporting his far-right wing odious views, and none challenging him and opposing his stance, then the 1000s of gay electors in his Aldershot constituency should be ashamed – get writing now!

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.