Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

David Cameron praises gay tolerance in Tory conference speech

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. and for those youngsters fleeing homophobic persecution at home .. no housing benefit until they are 25 years old ….(if they win the next election).

    1. I don’t know why this is being red-arrowed. It’s completely true that the cuts are having a disproportionate effect on LGBT youth.

      1. de Villiers 3 Oct 2013, 8:37am

        Completely true? And disproportionate in relation to whom? Disproportionate is a relative term. It requires a comparator.

        Are LGBT people being hit disproportionately in relation to the disabled? Or those who are non-white? Or those who have been failed by the education system?

        Every group can point out why they are being hit hard by “cuts” – even though government spending has increased by more than the rate of inflation each year since the election. The cuts are to departmental spending rather than overall spending.

        The government presently spends more than it receives in tax. It will continue to do that until at least 2020. The debt of this country will exceed one trillion pounds : £1×10 to the 12th or £1,000,000,000,000. That will disproportionately affect the next generation who will have to pay back this debt.

        At a time of such economic desperation, we should be celebrating that David Cameron is praising homosexuality than trying to make us scapegoats.

  2. I think he needs to point out that “tolerance” to all the Tories who were spewing hate speech a short while ago during the equal marriage debate – and the majority of his party who opposed our rights

    1. de Villiers 3 Oct 2013, 8:37am

      What do you think he was doing in that speech?

  3. Its a bit rich coming from the party who introduced Clause 28.

    Cameron started by praising Thatcher-
    And it was Thatcher who said “no one in Britain has a right to be gay”

    1. de Villiers 3 Oct 2013, 8:39am

      Most people in England support Winston Churchill even though he expressed sympathies with the system of fascism and support theories of white racial supremacy in Africa.

      I think that you need to move on.

  4. Robert in S. Kensington 2 Oct 2013, 1:26pm

    As far as giving women the vote, I hope he didn’t imply that we were the first country to do so. New Zealand was the first country in 1920.

    In spit of the nastiness of the Tory party, I never imagined that slightly less than half supported the Marriage Bill. I thought it would have been far less so in some way, it has taken an extremely important step forward given it’s track record and with more openly gay MPs than Labour or Liberal Democrats.

    1. minor correction there, technically Sweden came way before that in 1718 in which woman who were members of a city guild (and therefore taxpayers) were allowed to vote although that was taken away when they changed their constitution in 1771, New Zealand actually gave the vote in 1893 but bared woman from standing for election until 1919

  5. And did he condemn the neo fascist extremist bigotry of the MAJORITY of Tory MPs who still believe we are 2nd class citizens.

    A majority of Tory MPs are bigot scum.

    We must remember their names at the next election.

  6. I can see why opinion polls put Mr Cameron ahead of his own party for popularity.

  7. He can pledge all the support he likes for rich, white, gay men, but while his government is cutting away at the public sector, privatising the NHS and slashing people’s benefits, I’ll still hold him and his party in deep contempt.

    1. Credit where credit’s due ! There may be all sorts of other issues, but Cameron definitely got it right on Equal Marriage. Approval doesn’t imply acceptance of the whole manifesto.

      Refusing to accept this point simply means that other leaders will be deterred from doing what is right. They will think that if even those the measure benefits don’t appreciate it, the effort just isn’t worth the aggravation it generates from the bigots. That scenario wouldn’t do us any favours at all.

      And why do you assume that all gays are rich and white? Something about motes and eyes comes to mind…

      1. I give Cameron credit for equal marriage. I’m glad gays who have Victorian views on most other issues can now feel comfortable voting for the Conservative Party. But it is really only icing on the cake when it comes to LGBT rights/liberation and life in general. What’s the point if we’ve got no housing, education, food or healthcare?

        I wasn’t saying that all gays are rich and white, I was saying that Cameron is acting in the interest of those gays who ARE rich and white.

        1. de Villiers 3 Oct 2013, 8:47am

          YOu are not the only one who thinks they know how the world works. France has one of the most generous social systems and highest tax rates of any country I know – and yet the poor classes there and in the French banlieues are in a desperate situation and have engaged in mass riots.

          Your reference to “liberation” is what reveals you. You take a position on the political left and attack David Cameron for being on the right. The welfare policies of the government are less radical than those of Bill Clinton as President and are an extension of those of the previous Labour government, which is why the Labour party has not criticised the principles behind them.

          Your insult that those who are on the right are “victorian” and view that there is no benefit to negative rights without positive rights are straight from the Cass Sunstein school of thought and is unpleasantly superior and supercilious.

  8. I don’t want to be “tolerated”. I want to be CELEBRATED!

    I don’t know why the first few comments got so many down votes. Did PinkNews get hit with an early morning troll invasion this morning?

    1. Must be telepathy ! Only saw your post the moment I posted mine. Spooky…

  9. I don’t want to be ‘tolerated’ !

    I want to be ACCEPTED. As an Equal. NO ifs, NO buts.

    Tolerance means putting up with something you dislike, but about which you can’t quite be bothered to make a fuss, or feel it might be unwise to do so.

    In this context ‘tolerance’ is a highly pejorative term that should be avoided, rather like the tabloid reports (thankfully quite rare now) of someone ‘confessing’ or ‘admitting’ to being gay. Let’s run it out of town !

    1. de Villiers 3 Oct 2013, 8:29am

      I agree – but you cannot force people to like you. If people are ready to accept me, then good. If not, then I want them to leave me alone and I will leave them alone, in an act of tolerance or mutual restraint.

  10. The problem with living in a “tolerant” society is that people might accept us, but they still don’t understand us.

    They still think it’s a mental thing, something that happens during childhood, something that is un-natural, and something that is an accident that shouldn’t actually happen.

    We live in a “one foot in, one foot out” of the closet society where it’s OKAY TO BE GAY! As long as you’re 1. not too gay 2. never talk about it outside of your designated “gay zone” and 3. look/act/speak exactly like a straight person.

    People don’t care if you’re homosexual, as long as you’re “normal”.

    I hate that. I won’t be happy until they’re teaching kids in school that we ARE natural and we AREN’T a glitch. I have a lot of straight friends because I’m “straight acting”: if I was a drag queen super star they probably wouldn’t like me.

    They don’t like anyone who breaks the gender binary or the status quo; and we’ve got a lot of “know your place” gays who just want to be accepted

  11. LOL ‘Tolerance’ from the Tory Party! Yeah, sure they are tolerant provided you are very wealthy and woe betide you if you are unemployed for any length of time because if you are you are utter scum AND a criminal too boot.

    After all, isn’t it a well-known fact that the unemployed CREATE THEIR OWN UNEMPLOYMENT?

    It is in Tory world!

    1. de Villiers 3 Oct 2013, 8:52am

      Unemployment is the absence of something. How can you “create” an absence of something?

      Some people may be responsible for the unemployment if they choose not to accept positions of work. But I doubt that anyone argues that people “create” their own unemployment.

      Further, since the general election each loss of a job in the public sector has been matched by more than on job being created in the private sector.

      Remember what was said in the written note left by the previous Labour minister Liam Byrne when the government changed “I’m afraid to tell you there’s no money left”. That was because the Labour government ran budget deficits during a period of boom instead of running budget surpluses. That is the reason for the that mess we are in – countries such as Australia and those in the far-east who ran budget surpluses have suffered no recession.

  12. We didn’t get round to legalising homosexual acts until about 100 years after the (Muslim) Ottoman Empire though!

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all