Reader comments · Baroness Knight: Parliament can’t help blind people see, so can’t help ‘artistic’ gays get married · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Baroness Knight: Parliament can’t help blind people see, so can’t help ‘artistic’ gays get married

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. This woman makes me sick

    1. Sister Mary Clarence 3 Jun 2013, 8:31pm

      Bless her, she can’t have long left.

      Sorry, what’s that?

      Yep, you’re right – too fvcking long!!!

      1. I once drove down a very narrow street in her old constituency only to find her coming the other way. There was no room to pass and parked cars on my side so she had to mount the pavement to get by. She was not happy because I refused to reverse.

        Well Dame Jill, I am still not going backwards or getting out of your way and that street is now one way so they wouldn’t let you down it at all. Society changes, you will have to go down a different road.

        Actually I was shocked to see she was still alive and bitter after all these years.

        1. nixiotemba 3 Jun 2013, 9:06pm

          but hearing her stupid ranting did please me somehow

          1. She would embarrass herself less if she took up a career as an 85yr old pole dancer than parade for filthy prejudices as she has done, what a vile and disgusting sow.

      2. Pity dementia hasn’t claimed her, or has it?

    2. Me too. Physically sick.

    3. That’s because she is sick!

  2. Artistic?? this lady certainly doesnt know me, im far from it.

    Im a computing student, the only thing i understand is logic, this lady certainly doesnt have any logic but she sure is creative in her reasoning

  3. Sparky (@Sparkyu1) 3 Jun 2013, 7:27pm

    Why do these sickening bigots continue to have a voice in politics? Why haven’t the Tories ejected someone this vile?

    1. Because the Tories are, at heart, this vile. She was and still is the true face of the Conservative Party at large in this country. Never forget it.

  4. Tim Hanafin 3 Jun 2013, 7:29pm

    She’ll be dead soon but not nearly soon enough to stop here poisonous rhetoric and voting. That she introduced the despicable Section 28 says it all.

  5. Robert (Kettering) 3 Jun 2013, 7:33pm

    God! Is this old hag still alive? Thought she kicked the bucket years ago.

    What a nasty old cow she really is and how insulting in her choice of words. She is a throw back to another era, the 1400s perhaps?

  6. Whilst I am partially sighted and have quite extreme low vision, I feel left out that im not artistic. My boyfriend will also tell you I am far from “delightful” when i first wake up in the morning with no coffee in my system.

    Seriously, who is this woman? It is ridiculously bizarre that we supposedly live in a democracy, but a group of rich, unelected pensioners have the final say on everything.

    These people have no place being the “highest in the land”. What do you say to suicidal gay teens who hear this tripe from our so called “betters”.

    1. Well I understand her point about the blind, because obviouslly she is blind as a bat to any truth. But as an American I fear I am fuzzy on the concept of a “Lord” voting on someone else’s “equality”…to be honest I just don’t get that part. Lovely accents though, you British folk have great accents…. Well I suppose it’s we Americans who have the accents isn’t it? So much for equality.

    2. The Lords can vote against a bill but that may not stop it becoming law.
      It’s the Commons, the elected house, that has the final say and even if defeated in the Lords a bill can still become law.
      Likewise it does not need the consent of the monarch. The monarchs consent is a polite notion and not a requirement.

  7. The comment about blind people is really disgusting

    1. Totally agree. Blind people, as everyone, should be considered equal under the law.

  8. On a more positive note, it’s quite refreshing to see how many old tories are actually in favour of this bill. Unfortunately I appear to have missed this old hags speech.

  9. She is a witch, with a capital B.

  10. “very delightful, very artistic” Imagine saying something so stereotypical about black people- They play the banjo very well and many are good dancers, but…….

    This stereotype of gays is something some feel comfortable with anything else is getting uppity! Actually even the homo hysterics amongst them must have cringed a bit when they heard her speak.

    1. Yes, it’s no different than if she was saying about black people “they shine shoes and tap dance really well but they shouldn’t be allowed to marry whites”
      The prejudice she parades and gets away with is staggering.

  11. In 1918 the Representation of the People Act 1918 was passed, enfranchising women over the age of 30 who met minimum property qualifications. The Representation of the People Act 1928 extended the voting franchise to all women over the age of 21.
    This vile old witch was born in 1928 – you would think she’d have an understanding of what equality means her mother was born without the right to vote FFS.
    Why any woman would not support SSM is beyond me.
    BTW I’m partially sighted and can be very artistic – I’m also left handed but you left that out dear.

    1. Hereditary women peers have only been allowed to sit in the House of Lords since the Peerage Act 1963. This horror and other women in the HOL have really short memories or really don’t get the whole equalities thing. It would be sad if it was not so annoying.

  12. What a shame she didn’t join her chum Maggie in the fires of hell.

    1. Give it time, give it time….

  13. WTF!!!
    How did this 85 year OLD idiot get into the H.O.L.
    If this so wasn’t pathetic it would be hysterical!
    Retirement is a must!!

  14. Midnighter 3 Jun 2013, 7:53pm

    Herp derp because fish aren’t equal to cabbages burble pass the sherry.

    “Christian teachers now tell us that this bill will force them to teach homosexuality, entirely against their conscience. ”
    Good. They shouldn’t be even allowed anywhere near children, let alone the teaching profession if they believe brainwashing is part of their remit.

    1. I know. Under that argument, Christian RE teachers should be excluded from teaching about Judaism or the pillars of Islam. It’s nonsense. Teaching is about the presentation of information not personal propaganda.

      Of the teaches I know, they say its a non-issue. They’re far more concerned with the volume of homophobic slang used in school and I think gay marriage will certainly mitigate that.

      If I was a teacher I would seriously resent being used as a human shield in the so called moral debate on this issue.

  15. Helge Vladimir Tiller 3 Jun 2013, 7:53pm

    This person is repeating all the prejudices I heard during my teens in Norway— more than 50 years ago !Where has she been living ? What has she been reading? This is almost unbelievable ! Lady, YOU are THE VERY PROOF that gays and lesbians are a 100% right when we claim our rights !

  16. Does anyone buy arguments from dodgy analogies anymore?
    Blindness is physical, marriage is a social construct.
    Even ignoring that, I’m pretty sure the health secretary could pass a bill to put more money towards treating cataracts on the NHS… just as parliament can expand the definition of marriage.
    Anyone who dogmatically implies “Marriage is between a man and a woman” is committing the etymological fallacy. Words can and do change their definitions frequently.

    Baroness Knight needs lessons in elementary logic.

    1. Don’t know what she’d do with any new-found skill in logic. It’s clearly not been a part of her life for the last 85 years

  17. Chris Quinton 3 Jun 2013, 8:02pm

    No, Baroness Knight, it is NOT built on lies. It is built on what should be an inalienable right. Not so very long ago, laws had to be passed to protect the rights of racial minorities. How is this any different?

  18. Her speech was filth.

  19. Would it be so very, very wrong to hpe someone creeps up behind her and shouts ‘BOO!’ loudly – and as many times as necessary?

    Well, yes, it is wrong and I’d never advocate anyone doing it. But I’d probably laugh anyway.

  20. Die you old Bitch!

  21. Oh hell. I failed Art O-level. Does this mean I’ve been unknowingly straight all these years?!

    1. You Sir have made my day :)

  22. Hey, everyone, I’m artistic! That explains why I drew a Picasso. I had a professor once who could see and became blind because of an explosion. I suppose a higher authority made him blind. There are children who are missing limbs because of landmines. A higher authority took away their limbs, so it is okay. We should not make prostheses for them because a higher authority did not want them to have all their limbs. Who are we to argue? I also want to clarify something: seeing as marriage is for making children, should two heterosexuals who do not want children have sex out of wedlock? Is that the plan of the higher authority?

  23. Disgrace and insulting to all gay people I guess it ok to say old cow like her should be retired

    Stupid cow forgets people like Alan tuning saved manybUK lives

  24. I really feel compelled to write my utter disgust at such a vitriolic statement by such a despicable and vicious old woman who should have been reprimanded for inciting such hatred against the gay & lesbian community. Shameful she actually gets to vote on such an issue!

  25. That There Other David 3 Jun 2013, 8:40pm

    I’m finding all these anti-Bill speeches rather encouraging. Not one of them has presented anything resembling a logical argument, whereas those supporting the Bill are making very well thought out and reasoned speeches as to why the Lords should follow the Commons and vote the Bill into law.

    I’m beginning to hope that this is going to breeze through. Man, I really hope so.

    1. I know what you mean.

      However, just because we see the stupidity of their arguments doesn’t mean that the Peers do.

      I’m one of the geeks who has been following the debate in the Lords today. One thing that is apparent is that even the anti-gay marriage Lords recognise that their email boxes have been stuffed with generic anti-equal-marriage messages whereas the pro-same-sex marriage have been individual and written from the heart.

      If someone can be bothered to post on PinkNews, they should be able to send a lobbying message on

      It’s incredibly easy. There are no whistles or bells on the site – it just ells you what you need to know.

      All you have to do is tell the Peer in front of you why you believe in same-sex marriage, hit send and then confirm in your email account.

      Everyone on PinkNews should do it.

      It’s really easy and it can work.

  26. Andrew J Cameron 3 Jun 2013, 8:41pm

    what an evil old witch, she should be horsewhipped for her homophobic views

  27. Christopher Coleman 3 Jun 2013, 9:06pm

    Why do so many people link sexual activity with marriage as though you can’t have one without the other? Sex is a separate matter and frequently takes place outside marriage, very successfully and, often, very fruitfully. Silly woman, who is granted a public voice. Indeed people are not born equal. Some are born blind, deaf and with many other problems. However, modern medicine does cure some of these conditions. Come to think of it, so did Jesus, whom many of these conservatives claim to follow. If her ladyship’s logic is followed, we should prevent medicine form evening out some of the natural inequalities. Born blind? Stay that way. But try not to be like the baroness, born with common sense that somehow atrophies with experience.

  28. The dinosaur has spoken.

    Maybe she might drop dead of old age until voting starts.

    1. That would be instantaneous karma.

  29. BURN THE WITCH …. and watch her burn. Fire with fire, only fair

    1. But she’s not a witch she is a Christian, don’t shift the blame for this savage old prejudiced ignoramus to witches.

  30. These kind of idiots do not deserve any kind of respect. They are hateful and stupid.

  31. “Some are stronger, cleverer, lazier, plainer, better looking, than others. Some people can see Others are blind.”

    But they can all get married so long as they are straight, what’s your point Mrs?

  32. “But a far higher authority than even anyone here has already decided that people are not equal….Some people can see Others are blind”

    Nice. So blind people aren’t equal? Should we get going and deprive them of rights, Baroness? Shall we ban blind people from getting married? Actually, shall we make blindness illegal and say it’s a ‘lifestyle choice’?

    What an embarrassingly stupid woman! People might not be *the same* but we are all EQUAL.

  33. This spectre actually works in our favour. Her speech is so out of date that it will sway people towards our point of view (those of us who support equal marriage rights).

    As the creator of Section 28 it is amusing to see that she is still bleating about homosexuality being taught in schools. After all these years she still doesn’t get it:

    It’s not “teaching homosexuality” but teaching ABOUT homosexuality. Just as children learn about Nazism and the holocaust in schools.

    Every MP who voted against this Bill should be made to listen to this speech on a loop. Look, Sarah Teather and friends, what company you keep! This will be you in half a century’s time.

  34. Don’t forget, boys and girls, that this was the woman who argued for Section 28 quoting the ‘Give us your children’ speech- utterly failing to realise that it was irony. No hope then, no hope now…

  35. If we are indeed more creative, it is perhaps because we have had to be so to succeed in a homophobic society.

    Sh1t, is that an argument to retain discrimination? – so that we stay fabulous!

  36. This is the equivalent of an ageing boss pinching the ass of every girl and telling them to shut up and look pretty. What a vile and disgusting human being. I hope she drowns in the bile of her own hate every night from tomorrow. As antiquities go there is nothing sweet and jolly about what this old sow has to offer…!

  37. The elderly can be very sweet-looking and fluffy-haired, but they shouldn’t be allowed to express opinions or vote in Parliament.

    1. Ageist remark that has no place in PN, every bit as bad as a homophobic remark.

    2. What a very stupid remark – are you related to Baroness Knight?

      1. I thought this was just a sarcastic reframing of what the Baroness said, not that he really thinks of elderly people in this way… maybe i’m wrong though.

        Oh and what a stupid, stupid, stupid woman – she really helps our side in making the anti-gay brigade look ever more desperate and insane.

  38. Robert in S. Kensington 3 Jun 2013, 9:55pm

    What a vile disgusting creature whose expiration date is long past. What an embarrassment to the Tory party, up their with Tebbit and Dear, a dying breed thanfully though not fast enough for my pleasure.

    She ought to be censured for her homophobic comments and booted out on her fat arse, stupid old harridan.

  39. It’s now 21 years since the Tories won a general election.

    Someone should tell the leadership that her repugnant views will merely help to guarantee that the Tories will never win again !

  40. Robert in S. Kensington 3 Jun 2013, 9:59pm

    I wonder how many ‘hear hears’ were elicited from those Tory dinosaurs in opposition when she opened her gob to rant her nonsense?

    1. I heard none. But the microphones don’t pick up everything.

  41. James Butterworth 3 Jun 2013, 10:00pm

    thank you, Dame Knight, for saying that we are “delightful” and “artistic” people, however I have to point out that physical disability cannot be equated to sexuality. we build ramps for the paralyzed, train guide-dogs for the blind, in an effort to give them an equal life. however like them, being gay is not a choice, it is how we are made. Nobody deserves the right to tell me I cannot marry “because it’s unnatural”. as for your take on marriage being about a man and a woman creating a child, I have one word for that: “ADOPTION”

  42. “Men cannot bear children and women cannot produce sperm and no law on Earth can change that”
    No, you silly old trout, and there is no law on Earth can make you any less of a bigoted, homophobic and patronising old bag.

  43. If there was ever a reason for shutting down the House of Lords for being a dangerous anachronism it has to be this dangerous rat of a peddling old lie monger. She trots out lie after lie after sickening lie trotted out to sound like words of wisdom. It’s this old trout who caused misery for thousands by entrenching a legal right of prejudice for one section of society against another with section 28.

  44. Bigot then, bigot now. It gives me great satisfaction to know that I can look forward to soon being married whereas all she can look forward to is soon being dead.

  45. christina dobbs 3 Jun 2013, 10:11pm

    This is an outdated argument! What does sperm & bearing a child have to do with equality?

  46. yeah.. all people are equal but some were more equal than others. where the hell do they get these cretins from? animal farm?

    1. Did you see Lord James of Blackheaths speech? He mentioned animal farm too!

  47. CH Brighton 3 Jun 2013, 10:34pm

    If this is what counts for reasoned debate in the upper chamber of the British parliament, then maybe regular training in democracy and citizenship should be made mandatory for their lord and ladyships. Classes that help them understand what it is they are supposed to be doing so they develop a sense of the impact of their prejudiced mumbo-jumbo on people’s lives.

  48. But I only got a C in GCSE art, many of the straight students did better than me. I’m confused.

  49. She looks like one of those sweet old ladies you might chat to at the bus stop…. but then she speaks…

  50. Thought the vile evil creature was dead by now.Even worse than Thatcher.

  51. This woman would fit right in comfortably in the some of the state governments in America (looking at you, Oklahoma, Texas, Idaho, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida).

  52. Stupid cow!.

  53. This isn’t about just marriage, this is about equality. This is about the right to be able to do something that has been denied to people who want that right and that acceptance. It’s about having a choice to decide what you want and what you don’t. I for one never want to get married nor fall in love, but that’s my choice and maybe it’ll change in the future. Except the LGBT community doesn’t have that choice, but I do, and that’s not fair. Yes, we can’t be fair to all but we can try and equality is about trying.

  54. how is it that people that this 85yr obviously far from rational and with very little awareness of reality unelected peer be allowed to continue to have any influence at all in the passing of legislation affecting peoples lives…… along with all the other bigoted and blinkered irrelevent dinosaurs in parliament……. we have to prove that we are fit to drive our cars after the age 70 and that our actions won’t endanger others.. do they not get regular assessments to check their ability to continue working. i certainly wouldn’t have returned her Driving licience based on todays behaviour

  55. Fickle fortune, not God, decide that some are to the manor born, some marry into it, some earn it, others are denied it. How did the Baroness Knight gain hers (protected rules of marriage?) and how was it God’s choice for her? Perhaps she needs to lose it to gain some humility before God and rid herself of that unearned Privilege she brags about in her title or is she just another poseur hiding behind a title? That eye of the needle is going to distress those enormous hips of hers, so I doubt if she will get into heaven with that attitude. Oh dear, to each his/her own.

    1. If there is a heaven or hell, which I don’t believe there is, perhaps she will reside permanently in purgatory, a position in which she is trying to keep gay people on this earthly plane. She ilso clearly a racist, given her association with The Monday Club and its memmbers like Enoch Powell. Whatever happened to her so called Christian Charity?

  56. Ahhh, this doddering oldster was awarded her title which obviously has gone to her head. Married to an optician after WWII, therein lies the rub from whence the “blind” comparison came. She proceeds to repeat all the Mormon lies about equality that came during the US California Proposition 8 atrocity funded by the Catholic and Mormon Churches interfering in national politics from one religion from one state (Utah) interfering in the sovereign election of another state (California). She has read her propaganda well. Perhaps she is channeling the Marquess of Queensbury who discovered that two of his sons were “Artistic and Nervous” and proceeded to place the blame elsewhere in a spasm of nerves?

    1. Peter Duncan 4 Jun 2013, 12:25pm

      I don’t think that she has read anything published on Gays since 1955

  57. Ahhh, this doddering oldster was awarded her title which obviously has gone to her head. Married to an optician after WWII, therein lies the rub from whence the “blind” comparison came. She obviously doesn’t move beyond her simple field of knowledgel But then she proceeds to repeat all the Mormon lies about equality that came during the US California Proposition 8 atrocity funded by the Catholic and Mormon Churches interfering in national politics from one religion from one state (Utah) interfering in the sovereign election of another state (California). She has studied her propaganda well. Perhaps she is channeling the Marquess of Queensbury who discovered that two of his sons were “Artistic and Nervous” and proceeded to place the blame elsewhere in a spasm of pugilistic nerves?

  58. Daniel Moreau 4 Jun 2013, 1:09am

    I am nearly speachless…to suggest that your bias (whatever the source) should be taken into consideration is absurd and downright obscene…the baroness needs to go to bed and have a very very long rest….she is obviously too tired to think straight…

  59. James Savik 4 Jun 2013, 1:18am

    I am neither nice or artistic.

    1. Could you smile more and maybe get some crayons and paper, (It is very naughty to draw on the walls unless your name is Banksy)?

    2. Neither is she, nice or artistic!

  60. I am so sorry this person is so ignorant, she should have been put out to pasture a long time ago.

  61. FilipinoBRIT 4 Jun 2013, 2:08am

    I’m disgusted by her! WOW!!! The bill will pass the Parliament wthere she likes it or not! She stereotypes the LGBT community on her speech! SHAME SHAME SHAME!

  62. I thought dinosaurs died out many thousands of years ago. Clearly I was wrong.

  63. Yup – there’s no fixing stupid, this woman is the proof, the vile author of section 28 – vile then, vile now.
    Glad I missed the live version on parliament TV. Euwgh !

    1. Shudder

  64. alwaysniceman 4 Jun 2013, 4:13am

    I think it is another Krystyna Pawlowicz

  65. Christopher in Canada 4 Jun 2013, 4:47am

    Yet someone prescribed her eyeglasses…

  66. Graham S. 4 Jun 2013, 4:50am

    Who voted for this delusional dinosaur? It’s infuriating and bizarre that we have such archaic and possibly senile geriatrics making our laws. Her argument has more holes than a sieve which possibly reflects on what’s going on inside her head.

  67. Graham S. 4 Jun 2013, 5:00am

    She also left out the fact that gay people can be scientific too like Alan Turing who helped save her scrawny neck and secure the freedom and democracy that she now enjoys. If people are not equal why doesn’t she just go home and wash the dishes and leave the thinking to some clever young men? A hundred years ago she couldn’t even vote. Is that right? Surely men and women are not equal? She’s demented.

  68. Dreadful woman. How dare she patronise us as being delightful and artistic…pffft. Typical old school ‘born to rule’ Tory, racist to boot given her connections to the discredited Monday Group. Oh, and as for being a Christian, well she doesn’t get the basic tenet of love, peace and goodwill to all humans. Regarding the discredited Section 28 that she sponsored, lets forget the ’28’ and section her to the loony bin when she and her mad ideas belong. For her sense of dress, I hope the Pearly Kings and Queens give her the cold shoulder.

  69. Raspberry blower 4 Jun 2013, 6:13am

    Hmmm, blind faith methinks.

  70. Its the projectile vomiting tory dame from ‘Little Britain’ – no fiction!

  71. My sister is a straight married woman. She and her husband love each other very much but they can’t have children. Does this mean THEIR marriage isn’t a real one? Knight really is a bigoted dinosaur. How did she get into a position of power?

  72. phil armond 4 Jun 2013, 7:00am

    She has not yet realised, she is “yesterday’s” people, the world now is belongs to the new generation. I bet she wears a skirt above her ankles, but her mother would not dare do that. The world changes..put up or shut up.

    1. Very true!

      It was good to see some of the Lords commenting that the younger generation do not have as much of a problem with same sex marriage. A lot were also saying that it is not up to them to derail this bill as they are a non-elected house

  73. I am an American, but I really don’t get how “Lords” can talk about equality…and vote against it, perhaps.

  74. To be fair on her, the comparison to the blind was taken out of context. In her speech what she was saying was that while it was unequal that gay people can’t have children, this isn’t something parliament can change, and she was also concerned (without justification) that churches would be forced to marry gay people.

    We may not agree with these views but we can’t call everyone homophobic just because they don’t support equal marriage.

    1. The simple fact here is that she is not comparing like for like.

      All she is doing is showing her blatant homophobia and long with what appears a scant disregard for those who are blind.

    2. Gay people CAN have children. We’re just as fertile as anyone else, thanks.

  75. People are not equal – some people are blind. Homophobic and disablist – what a classy woman.

  76. I have written to this “Lady”. Also to “Lord” Dear asking him to resign as he was not democratically elected. Please do the same.

  77. Did they find her on the jurassic coast ?

  78. She is a vile old hag who should have no place in modern politics.

    Society has and still is moving on yet she continues to sit in the dark ages.

    Her comments were highly insulting.

  79. Jill Knight did not have honesty and the gumption to end her sentence in the way she truly feels, to say:

    “Of course homosexuals are delightful people, very artistic, and they are very loving people too. No one doubts that for one single moment, but . . . THEY ARE SECOND-RATE, THEY ARE SIMPLY NOT AS GOOD AS HETEROSEXUALS!”

    She didn’t have the gumption to say it!

    Cowardess Baroness!

  80. Jock S. Trap 4 Jun 2013, 11:22am

    This woman must need her Winter fuel payment because Damn… she is cold!!!

    It’s these bigots that continue to damage just because they cannot accept change, nor see that society has changed.

    We no longer live in the 1950’s so there should be no excuses for her bigotry.

  81. No laws on earth?
    Cant make the blind see? – Optic nerve implants?
    Women can’t produce sperm? – Stem cell research has produced artificial sperm using bone marrow.
    Men cant bear children? – Medical science is researching Ectopic implantation to assist women with unformed uteri, but there is no reason why this could not be performed on a male either.
    So once again the only laws stopping us are bigoted, outdated laws misinterpreted from a 1000 year old book.
    The Laws of science and fact would be so much further ahead if it didn’t have the religious chains holding it back.

  82. I realize this is straying from the point but maybe someone should explain gender re-assignment to her and watch as her head dissolves into a cloud of steam? There are some scientists who are trying to induce pregnancy in men [ yes really ] and some futurologists/trans-humanists see us moving towards a post- binary gendered society. Admittedly this point is peripheral to SSM but it would be interesting to see her reaction to living in the 21st century.

  83. She should marry Lord Tebbit, they have so much in common.
    A match made in hell. Yuck!

  84. She should marry Lord Tebbit, they have so much in common.
    A match made in hell. Yuck!

  85. Jenny The Doctors Daughter 4 Jun 2013, 1:07pm

    Blind people CAN GET MARRIED though! Just as a point to throw her argument off. And there are SO many points to throw it off (a very high cliff would be suitable I think) disgusting how she’s trying to disguise her blatant discrimination as acceptance. You’re not fooling anyone dear.

  86. On yer broomstick you old bag!

  87. Quite apart from things like cataract removal, we are indeed obligated to help people with visual impairments. She should check out the Equality Act, and prior to that the Disability Discrimination Act. Of course, this government couldn’t give a toss about people with disabilities. A survey by Guide Dogs for the Blind found that around 97% of people with visual impairments can’t get information they can read (large print etc.) from the NHS, which is the first place you’d expect to supply it. I’m amongst them.

  88. Vile!!What The Heck Is She Doing In British Parliament? Does She Have A Twitter, I Wanna Tweet Her Something. Uk Has Some CraZy Nuts Too! Sickened By Her Bigoted arguments

  89. aldrich22 4 Jun 2013, 9:14pm

    I NEVER Believe In Dinosaurs! Seriously! Always Thought They Are Mythical CreatUres Like Dragons Or Perhaps Mermaids… Not Until Now!!! Now, I Do Believe They Exists!! And One Of Them Sits At The Upper House Of BritisH Parliament!

  90. These people, particularly the hereditary lords, didn’t choose their lifestyle. We should pity them and, perhaps, questions the rights they have.

  91. Baroness Knight made a proper spectacle of herself showcasing her repugnant, dated and tedious anti-gay prejudices.

    A nasty, spiteful and unpleasant relic making an exhibition of herself.

  92. Jane Vernon 5 Jun 2013, 12:41am

    I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. This woman doesn’t know the difference between equal and different.

    So, I’m blind, that makes me different from her, but I’m sure as hell equal to her.

    1. Baroness Jill Knight’s speech was no more than a vulgar display of hackneyed prejudice.

  93. Oh, dear. The garlic and the stake don’t seem to have worked.

  94. I don’t particularly care what your imaginary friends think about marriage, Jill. Let them show themselves and defend their atrocious views if they’re so set against it. Oh wait, for that to happen they’d need to first exist. We’re not a Christian nation anymore, Jill. Less than 20% of Brits are bible believing Christians, and only a quarter of those attend a weekly service. We don’t base our laws on the bible, if we had, you certainly wouldn’t have the right to speak your opinion in parliament. It’s time the HOL was sacked. We’re not a theocracy, we don’t need old senile appointed bureaucrats deciding the nations laws.
    Leave that to the Iranians.

  95. “. No one doubts that for one single moment, but marriage is not about just love. It is about a man and a woman, themselves created to produce children, producing children.”

    Helloooo? Baroness? Yes, then maybe introduce laws banning the marriage between heterosexual couples where either the man or the women or both are impotent/barren and indeed banning the marriage of asexual couples who pair as man and woman. She should try and negate the rights laid down to protect marriage of a heterosexual couple where one is now a post-op transsexual person.

    I also think David Attenborough would like a word in your ear about ‘Population Matters’.

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.