Reader comments · Pope Francis: The Catholic Church is ‘obsessed’ with same-sex marriage and abortion · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Pope Francis: The Catholic Church is ‘obsessed’ with same-sex marriage and abortion

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. A statement of the obvious? And let’s not forget that these are very convenient dog-whistle subjects to get the “faithful” to put money in the collection plate – and for the sake of political expedience. After all, who exactly is benefiting from correlating us with Satan? (as happened very recently).

    Does the left hand even know what the right hand is doing?

    And this is not a suggestion of changing tack, just talk about it less often? What does that practically mean, if anything at all?

    Unpopular as it may be (and I genuinely don’t care if it is) I’m really not in a hurry to thank the bully for taking time to consider whether or not the bullying should continue…

    1. de Villiers 20 Sep 2013, 6:58am

      A change of tone matters. It sets a direction for others to follow.

      At a time when President Putin and the leader of the Orthodox Church are openly making verbal attacks on gay people and homosexuality, the Pope has sought to say that he is no person to judge us, that he himself is a sinner and to try and change the tone when talking of homosexuality.

      A change of tone creates the space and confidence for others to go further and speak more positively. The current Catholic bishops and cardinals who attack homosexuality continue to follow the words and directions of previous popes. Pope François appears to want to stop that, in favour of a greater internal humility.

      I hope that this leads to better things.

      1. it won’t of course. Only last week we saw virulent attacks on SSM at the Scottish parliament from the official spokesman of the Church of Rome. And Francis has made it absolutely clear he is not altering their backward doctrine on gay or women’s issues.

        I am so glad that I live in a coutry which to the extent that it is religious at all is middle ground protestant.

      2. de Villiers 21 Sep 2013, 9:12am

        > I am so glad that I live in a coutry which to the extent that it is religious at all is middle ground protestant.

        Do you think that gay people in France are unhappy to live there?

  2. It’s amazing how naive some people can be, (going by what I’ve read in the comments on various sites, not so much here). They see a superficial headline that tries to portray the Pope as not being anti-gay, yet if you actually read into what he believes, his position’s no different than the church’s position has been for a while. He’s not revolutionary in the slightest, he’s being sly if anything. He still believes that the love shared between to same sex couples is ‘wrong’. He asks, ‘Who am I to judge gay people’. All the while judging gay people on how they love and how they share that love in their bedrooms.
    Sorry, not buying it.

  3. Quote: “It is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time”. At last – a pragmatist in the Vatican! He KNOWS they are gradulally talking themselves out of existence. Keep talking, I say ….

  4. Is this guy a sleeper agent or something?!!!

    1. qhat they called in the USA in the past – a fifth column – all but a spy.who worked for an enemy

  5. Robert in S. Kensington 19 Sep 2013, 5:38pm

    Leopards never change their spots. This is nothing more than window dressing to hopefully stunt the stinging attacks from progressives inside and outside his church. He’s made it quite clear that the teaching of the church hasn’t changed and won’t change. He’s fooling nobody. Just like his counterpart, Archbigot Welby, he hasn’t made any formal apology to gays for the immense harm and horrific treatment of gay people, much of it violent perpetrated throughout its long history of oppression. I don’t accept for a minute that this man is any different from his predecessors. His style and approach maybe different but that’s where it ends. Try a bit harder, Francis!

    1. Colin (London) 19 Sep 2013, 6:46pm

      Spot on Robert…well said.

    2. Helge Vladimir Tiller 19 Sep 2013, 7:27pm

      I fully agree !

  6. I am an atheist. However:

    The Catholic Church is OBLIGED to be obsessed with abortions. It is the view of their religion, based on the alleged “word of God” that abortion is murder, and only god may take a life.

    That is their belief. To act otherwise would be to admit that their god may not be correct.

    That can’t happen…

    1. They have changed their beliefs numerous times before, from geocentrism to non-Latin bibles to slavery to Limbo.

      1. none of the above are beliefs – people out of their depth again

        1. Rubbish, Ray. Absolute rubbish.

    2. Yet in the bible, their own god explains how to conduct an abortion to *test* the fidelity of their property, um excuse me, *women*. I guess abortion’s only wrong when god doesn’t do it. Not forgetting the fact that about half of all all human conceptions end in spontaneous abortions. And about 30% of all recognized pregnancies end in a miscarriage. Or the babies that are born entirely without skin and usually die within hours of birth, and all the other abnormalities babies are born with.
      A religious person needs to ask themselves: Whose design’s that?

      That said, I’m not ‘pro-abortion’ Ii hate the thought of unnecessary ones. But I’m anti-state dictating what I do with my body, even more so.

  7. floridahank 19 Sep 2013, 5:46pm

    The Pope doesn’t want to talk about “abortion, same-sex marriage and contraception ” yet these are constantly being argued and questioned by members of his Church. It’s a cop-out. He’s afraid of taking a religious position on these issues He is lazy and afraid — just letting the Catholic people not have a position towards the Pope — either for or against — the Pope is afraid of the main issues and that’s no wonder his people are fleeing the church.

    1. Floridahank, it’s because the church sees same sex marriage and abortion as issues that causes it to lose members, and because they believe them to take precedence over poverty, starvation and war, the church spent £50.000 here in Scotland to stop same sex marriage, the church can take solace in the knowledge they prolonged the inevitable meanwhile a child in need of food and water has died. Thats good old fashioned Christian morals for you

      1. Stonewall Scotland (£100,000),Equality Network (230,000) & LGBT Youth (£270,000 … used to be run by Jamie Rennie)- money spent on the pseudo-marriage campaign – all from the public purse.Three Quarters of the people of scotland reject distorting marriage .Same-sex ‘marriage’ is an oxymoron , just like male breastfeeding – just because it is a law does not mean it is true (remember 2+2 = 5 in Orwell’s 1984?) – and you think members are leaving because of this bonkers ‘issue’ ! Abortion kills 500 children everyday in this country (7 million so far) and millions throughout the globe – it is the biggest injustice in the world (we will always have poverty,starvation and war) .

        Interesting you blame the Church for poverty – being the biggest charity on the planet : 5,305 hospitals most of them in America (1,694) and Africa (1,150); 18,179 dispensaries mainly in America (5,762); Africa (5,312) and Asia (3,884); 547 Care Homes for people with Leprosy mainly in Asia (285) …..WHAT DO YOU DO

        1. Equality Network 20 Sep 2013, 7:46am

          Oh dear! Most of that is not worth replying to; however: none of the equal marriage campaign in Scotland has been funded from the public purse – it’s all funded through community fundraising (you can donate here: ).

          Over 60% of Scots support equal marriage, compared to around 25% who oppose it (source: Scottish Social Attitudes Survey and opinion polls).

        2. Gay rights groups pay taxes unlike your precious church which recieves tax exemption on the basis that it is charitable organization but has the money to fund political campaigns and influence politicians, then this tax exemption should be revoked and they can share the burden of restoring the economy, and in scotland catholic schools are funded by the Scottish government using tax payers money in a country where most people are irreligious,why should they be asked to pay for the church to teach its doctrine which by the way is rejected by most of their students, I went to a catholic school in North Ayrshire and a majority of the students were either humanist or atheist. The Consultation of same sex marriage show a majority of people who are resident in Scotland support the change 65% for gay marriage and 35% against. At least we don’t ask for money which is supposed to be given to help the sick and the poor, gay rights charities give their money to promoting equality

  8. Well, at least he seems to be doing better with this than his predecessor. Ratzinger was just insufferable.

    1. I’m not so sure. He’s very sly and has managed to pull the wool over many eyes. But he’s hardly any different. In fact, at least you knew where you stood with Ratzinger. With this one, you need to read the detail of what he’s saying, not just the headline. But they’re hardly any different. Both support the church’s current position: Gay people? Fine. Gay sex? Immoral.

  9. Well what can you expect from a bunch of celebates!? The more you suppress the more it seeps out in other ways- eg homophobia for one. Patriarchal bunkum going back to the Bronze Age- time they updated; though it took 400 years for a very begrudging ‘apology’ to Galileo! ,so do not hold breath…

    1. There are other homophobic religions, or branches of religions, where clergy are allowed, and usually expected, to marry, so I don’t think it’s necessarily anything to do with celibacy. Although I agree that enforced celibacy is a very strange thing to have as a job requirement, and not likely to lead to healthy ways of thinking. I think the problem here is more to do with rigidity of doctrine, the inability to adapt over the centuries.

  10. Tell it to your boy in Australia.

  11. and i’m proud to be an atheist… former christian

  12. Interestingly, it doesn’t seem to matter that much what the pope thinks as the majority of catholics in the US and UK do not agree with the popes / archbishops teaching – the majority of catholics are pro gay rights, not anti gay. And out of the 19 countries where equal marriage is legal, 9 of them are predominantly, or a catholic majority.

    So, the majority of catholics in the western world are not evil ‘gay haters’ as pink news would like us to think.

    1. Yeah, our problems aren’t with ordinary decent Catholics, they’re with the raving right of their church who are obsessed with opposing feminism, abortion and LGBT rights. To the exclusion of anything else. Unfortunately, under John Paul II and Benedict XVI, they ruled the roost within the Vatican.

    2. But the majority of catholics can be accused of rank hypocrisy, if not hate.

  13. Helge Vladimir Tiller 19 Sep 2013, 7:25pm

    As long as LGBTQ people are being suppressed and hated, dear Pope, SILENCE about our situation is our worst enemy !

    1. LGB…T what people ? You are all children of God .There is no silence about your situation either :

      ‘They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.’
      The Church is the best friend of homosexuals, both because she tells them they are made in God’s image and have intrinsic dignity and rights and are called to be saints, and because she is the only social force left that insists on moral absolutes—so when they sin against themselves she says NO, just as she does to heterosexuals who sin against themselves sexually, but when others sin against them she says NO also.
No one else dares to say NO. She speaks up for everyone, including homosexuals.

      1. Good grief – Your “god” fiction is a vicious psychopath, fiction’s greatest mass murderer, and not fit to lap dog sh!t from HitIer’s jackboot. Boggle in amazement at your invisible friend if you want – but spare us your pathetic risible bloody fairy tales.

        1. God is Santa Clause for grown ups.

          Take of the tinsel and the fairy lights, the bright red costume and *gasp* it’s the same damn guy

          1. I use this analogy as well. People never have an answer to that one.

      2. Go back to sleep. It’s okay. Let the adults do the talking. :)

  14. Too little – Too late.

    Catholics have been carpet bombing the Gay community for decades and now they are announcing smaller bomb runs and expect people to praise them for it???

    Forget it!

  15. He seems to have found some compassion as his recent comments are less absolute than ones made in his previous post. Compared to Ratzinger he is showing moderation and is stirring up debate in the church. Sadly, his beliefs about Gay love are still ignorant and bigoted.

  16. Keith in SALFORD 20 Sep 2013, 1:32am

    Let us agree, for the sake of argument, that marriage can only be between a man and a woman for the pro-creation of children… just for the sake of argument, mind…so don’t rush to red-thumb me yet, I ain’t done….
    Let us further agree, again for that same sake of argument, that since two men cannot produce a new human being then the Catholic church cannot condone gay marriage.
    Then, for me, far deeper is the question as to what kind of a god/God can that possibly be who creates two human beings with the desires/urges/hormones that they have and yet – as we are told, by His Church, through His vicar on earth etc etc etc… those two human beings/two men, in effect, can “look but don’t touch”…?

    Into perverse mind-games is this god/God, or what? CONTINUED..

    1. It’s called free choice .God through his infinite love, has gave us the ultimate freedom and has not made as all automatons.It’s up to us if we follow the way of light or the way of darkness .God does not play mind games , he respects our choices – even if we reject Him , he’ll still call as back .If we definitely reject Him, His Church on Earth and all that is good then it is us who send ourselves to Hell :

      “Eternal damnation”, therefore, is not attributed to God’s initiative because in his merciful love he can only desire the salvation of the beings he created. In reality, it is the creature who closes himself to his love. Damnation consists precisely in definitive separation from God, freely chosen by the human person and confirmed with death that seals his choice for ever. God’s judgement ratifies this state.

      1. You sound like a brain washed robot LOL

        If you live your life in fear of God’s judgement you live your life in fear of Santa Clause’s judgement because when you take off the tinsel and the fairy lights they’re pretty much the same all-seeing, all-knowing being who has been created to keep you under lock and key using terrorism.

        They threaten you with hell to keep you under control, they exploit your fear of death, and they exploit your fear of the unknown.

        Sin = do as I say or you’ll suffer
        Heaven = presents
        Hell = coal
        Santa = god in a red costume

        & everything that goes against them and what they think “God’s word” is can very conveniently be blamed on me. Including Christianities predecessor; paganism. Fancy that!

        Although the best trick I ever pulled was convincing the world I don’t exist, of course. *whistles*

        Which reminds me, Halloween is coming up. I better get my fangs and horns sharpened ;)

        Wake up!

        Lucifer, God, Santa Clause, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy.

      2. Gibbering nonsense dressed up as reasoning. There are no gods, no magic, and there is no afterlife. Religion is just a business making lots of lovely money out of delusional individuals just like you Ray. Of course many religionists are mentally ill and suffer terribly with religious mania, that is very sad. The majority of religionists are simply bone idle when it comes to thinking and reasoning, they just don’t care to think for themselves.

      3. Keith in SALFORD 20 Sep 2013, 8:46am

        How does “choice” come into it?
        I did not choose to be born homosexual.
        It therefore seems to me that this god/God is naughty, to say the least, to require his creations to act in a certain way and yet sets them up to fall/fail right from the beginning.
        I’m sorry; I don’t buy it and as soon as I could think for myself, at 18, 20, and away from barmy nuns, equally barmy Irish Christian Brothers, alcoholic Irish parish priests, fellow seminarians and fathers superior, I ditched the lot.
        Google, if you will, Sister Jeannine Gramick and Father Robert Nugent, if I come across as some crazed loon from oop t’north.
        They said much the same as I postulate here. And guess what; no surprise; they were ordered to stop teaching by your friend and mine, one J. Ratzinger.
        I don’t need priests and Bergoglio is precisely that; he’s simply a priest.
        I don’t need liturgies and fancy vestments and endless Ave Marias or any of it.


        1. No one is born same-sex attracted(‘gay’, homosexual or LGBT BLAHBALAH) , just as no one is born addicted to sniffing glue .People who label themselves ‘gay’ are exactly like anyone else – they are not a sub-species and they don’t have ‘gay’ genes either (science fiction).The choice to act out the distorted sexuality is a choice just like the choice to an act of adultery etc

      4. Are you for real…….ROFL

      5. Go back to sleep. Let the adults do the thinking for you. :)

    2. I believe homosexuality happens throughout humans and the animal kingdom because it preserves the species.

      Obviously when you’re told the only purpose of life is to reproduce at all costs, it can be easy to get the wrong idea. People focus on “reproduction” without considering that homosexual and heterosexual humans have been around for 100,000 years, haven’t been bred out, and are far from extinct. Seems to me God wants them for somethin, no matter what a 2000 year old roughly translated and plagiarized myth says.

      100,000 years ago, the gay tribe member would have played an important role in sustaining his tribe. He could gather lots of food and was a good hunter but of course did not reproduce, so he could share it with the people who needed it, including the tribes young. He also didn’t compete with other males for mating opportunities, which further helped sustain. He was probably a shaman, and his opinion was probably valued by his people.

      Shame things got so twisted !

      1. Colin (London) 20 Sep 2013, 10:41am

        Mr Pink I found this article very interesting. Thought I’d pass it to you for interest. I got the link on here. Titled Thinking about Gale Male Brains and is written by a straight man Todd Murphy

        1. Colin (London) 20 Sep 2013, 10:42am


        2. That is the same article in which I got the theory ! Of course it’s only a theory, but it makes a lot of sense.

          Quite frankly that article changed my life

      2. Interesting theory, but anyone who does not reproduce will not affect evolution. I’ve always assumed that the range of sexualities is one of those random things evolution throws up which don’t have any particular purpose, such as eye colour. Birds of paradise have all sorts of crazy feather colours and shapes. It’s sexual selection so it’s a kind of evolution, but it doesn’t serve a practical purpose exactly.

        As for tribal roles, I don’t know if we know all that much about 100,000 years ago, but within recorded anthropology, there have been all sorts of configurations of societies, many of which do not assume that every member of the tribe will reproduce. Same goes for animals. As I recall, it tends to be males who get left out of the reproductive pool rather than females, which doesn’t make sense considering that all genders have a variety of sexualities, but it could just be that I don’t know much about this.

  17. Keith in SALFORD 20 Sep 2013, 1:33am

    CONTINUED.. .. For me, my homosexuality. has led me, over 6 decades, to firstly abandon the Church in 1959 at 18 years of age having been told by my religious superior, as a seminarian, to seek electro-therapy for my “disease” .. .. my “perversion” .. my “homosexuality” and secondly, because of my homosexuality, or at least my Church’s teachings on it, I have abandoned all belief in any such BEING or ENTITY or SKY-FAIRY, if you want to call HIM/IT that.
    I cannot and don’t believe in any of it, not now at 70-odd .. .. and that is from a good, Mass-every-day, seminarian-as-a-kid, Catholic child, of the 1940’s/50’s.
    So for me, none of the warm Spring breeze that Francis now seems to be breathing thro’ the RCC in contrast to the disastrous, minus 50 degreesC, of that last-of-the-papal monarchs, Ratzinger, is all quite irrelevant.
    I have junked the lot for what it is; junk.

  18. Keith in SALFORD 20 Sep 2013, 1:53am

    The Church isn’t so much “obsessed with same -sex marriage and abortion” as it is with the lightness of today’s collection plates on account of its severe haemorrhaging of punters.
    No bums on pews = no coppers on plates.
    And that, in a nutshell, was why Ratzinger was made history.
    The answer, as always, lies in the till and so Bergoglio is no more- and no less- than a $horing up exercise

  19. Once again Pope Francis and his quotes have been copied and pasted out of context (it is PINK news after all – the ‘Freddie Starr ate my hamster’ take on the Church).

    What the Pope DID say is that “we cannot insist ONLY on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods.” He then stated that he would not discuss these issues because “the teaching of the Church, for that matter, is CLEAR.” Got that romophobes ?
    His quotes :’A human being is already there. I separate the topic of abortion from any religious concept. It is a scientific problem.To not let the development continue of a being who already has all the genetic code of a human being is not ethical.The right to life is the first of human rights.To abort is to kill someone who cannot defend himself’
    “it is an attempt to destroy God’s plan. It is not just a bill (a mere instrument) but a ‘move’ of the father of lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.” – on homo-pseudo marriage

  20. Quite frankly, I consider the Pope a propaganda artist. He functions in the same way of Joseph Goebbels and Ronald McDonald. He is pure PR.

    He tours like a rockstar; his clothes are worth a years wages for most people; his job is to shape public perception of a brand; he is pure PR.

    However, when you have people like the Pope and Tutu saying “Stop!”; people are going to have to start listening before things turn sour for them one way or another.

    1. Colin (London) 20 Sep 2013, 10:31am

      I agree..well observed.

  21. He is just being pragmatic. His racket loses more authority with each bigoted statement so he is trying to minimize the damage without actually changing his position.
    Smarter than the last pope, and more dangerous.

    1. I agree with every thing you have stated on here Ray.
      What most of you do not realise the Catholic Church does not make a collection of money on Masses the Priest undertakes Monday to Saturday. Money is collected only on a Sunday.
      Most Catholics do support the teachings of the Church and the Pope you should not believe surveys they use only a small amount of selected people in their surveys.
      The Church cannot change is teachings because they are based on the word of God, and are for all time.

      1. I’m sure the Greeks in classical Greece thought the same thing before their god died. Before their religion died, like you did before you, along with your god and your religion dies.
        Homosexuals, unlike your god, aren’t going anywhere. It’s a part of biological nature. Fabricated religions, however, come and go like the seasons. As we’ve seen time and time again.

  22. Look, “Is the Pope Catholic?” may as well be followed by “Is the Pope homophobic?” as a saying to describe something true. The Catholic church shows no signs of abandoning these positions during our lifetime, and it’s pointless to expect it.

    However, aren’t we always complaining that the Catholic church seems to be obsessed with these issues and ignoring the other matters it should be spending time and money on, such as world poverty? If this Pope really does move the focus away from abortion, contraception and LGBT issues, then yes, relatively speaking, it’s a step forward. It’s a step forward from a position which is ludicrously far back, but nevertheless, a small improvement.

    It remains to be seen whether he lives up to his promise, of course. The BBC article suggested that he’s getting flak for this position. The Catholic church isn’t about to disappear just because we don’t like it, so I’ll take whatever improvements we can get.

  23. Colin (London) 20 Sep 2013, 10:19am

    Catholic extermination camps
    Surpisingly few know that Nazi extermination camps in World War II were by no means the only ones in Europe at the time. In the years 1942-1943 also in Croatia existed numerous extermination camps, run by Catholic Ustasha under their dictator Ante Paveli, a practising Catholic and regular visitor to the then pope. There were even concentration camps exclusively for children!

    In these camps – the most notorious was Jasenovac, headed by a Franciscan friar – orthodox-Christian serbians (and a substantial number of Jews) were murdered. Like the Nazis the Catholic Ustasha burned their victims in kilns, alive (the Nazis were decent enough to have their victims gassed first). But most of the victims were simply stabbed, slain or shot to death, the number of them being estimated between 300,000 and 600,000, in a rather tiny country. Many of the killers were Franciscan friars. The atrocities were appalling enough to induce bystanders of the Nazi “Sicherheitsdien

    1. Colin (London) 20 Sep 2013, 10:20am

      t der SS”, watching, to complain about them to Hitler (who did not listen). The pope knew about these events and did nothing to prevent them. [MV]
      Catholic terror in Vietnam
      In 1954 Vietnamese freedom fighters – the Viet Minh – had finally defeated the French colonial government in North Vietnam, which by then had been supported by U.S. funds amounting to more than $2 billion. Although the victorious assured religious freedom to all (most non-buddhist Vietnamese were Catholics), due to huge anticommunist propaganda campaigns many Catholics fled to the South. With the help of Catholic lobbies in Washington and Cardinal Spellman, the Vatican’s spokesman in U.S. politics, who later on would call the U.S. forces in Vietnam “Soldiers of Christ”, a scheme wa

      1. Colin (London) 20 Sep 2013, 10:22am

        s concocted to prevent democratic elections which could have brought the communist Viet Minh to power in the South as well, and the fanatic Catholic Ngo Dinh Diem was made president of South Vietnam. [MW16ff]

        Diem saw to it that U.S. aid, food, technical and general assistance was given to Catholics alone, Buddhist individuals and villages were ignored or had to pay for the food aids which were given to Catholics for free. The only religious denomination to be supported was Roman Catholicism.

        1. Colin (London) 20 Sep 2013, 10:23am

          Rwanda Massacres
          In 1994 in the small african country of Rwanda in just a few months several hundred thousand civilians were butchered, apparently a conflict of the Hutu and Tutsi ethnic groups.
          For quite some time I heard only rumours about Catholic clergy actively involved in the 1994 Rwanda massacres. Odd denials of involvement were printed in Catholic church journals, before even anybody had openly accused members of the church.

          Then, 10/10/96, in the newscast of S2 Aktuell, Germany – a station not at all critical to Christianity – the following was stated:

          “Anglican as well as Catholic priests and nuns are suspect of having actively participated in murders. Especially the conduct of

          1. Colin (London) 20 Sep 2013, 10:25am

            a certain Catholic priest has been occupying the public mind in Rwanda’s capital Kigali for months. He was minister of the church of the Holy Family and allegedly murdered Tutsis in the most brutal manner. He is reported to have accompanied marauding Hutu militia with a gun in his cowl. In fact there has been a bloody slaughter of Tutsis seeking shelter in his parish. Even two years after the massacres many Catholics refuse to set foot on the threshold of their church, because to them the participation of a certain part of the clergy in the slaughter is well established. There is almost no church in Rwanda that has not seen refugees – women, children, old – being brutally butchered facing the crucifix.

            According to eyewitnesses clergymen gave away hiding Tutsis and turned them over to the machetes of the Hutu militia.

  24. He is attempting to turn a very large ship very slowly.

    He is a clever man and can see that they are losing the war that they created, if they carry on the way they have, they will ultimately lose.

    He it trying to dig them out of the hole they have put themselves in.

    He is on a losing game, but if we fight him, it will give him opponents ammunition and they will only dig their heels in and fight us harder, lets support him and work with him to turn this ship quicker.

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.