Reader comments · George Osborne compares equal marriage to the removal of slavery · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


George Osborne compares equal marriage to the removal of slavery

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. The new website layout is a DISASTER ! The comments are much harder to read because of the smaller print, the tiny comments boxes and the fact that most of the comment is often hidden.

    The main news page is also a mess. The big letterbox is just a waste of space, and the layout is all over the place. It’s just tinkering for the sake of tinkering.

    Please scrap it and go back to the original one. It was by no means perfect, but it was a lot better than this new one.

  2. Ian Bower 4 Oct 2013, 7:43pm

    I know it’s off topic but I too think the new layout is really tacky with so many distractions. It’s appalling.
    Oh and back to Osborne. Can we take anything he says seriously?

  3. I thought it looked much more professional.

    And going off topic no 2- What do you think of George Osborne’s new hairstyle? Cool ,eh??

  4. Well said George, and thank you.

  5. nodaybuttoday 4 Oct 2013, 10:37pm

    Conveniently forgetting that most Tories voted AGAINST equal marriage.

    1. Jane McQueen 5 Oct 2013, 9:41am

      Overall more Tories voted for Equal Marriage than against it, as remember the UK parliment is made up of both the House of Commons & House of Lords

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 5 Oct 2013, 12:30pm

        Including the Lords, yes you are right. Overall support was 73% in the Lords, 69% in the Commons.

    2. alexoloughlin 5 Oct 2013, 12:32pm

      Almost all of Labour wouldn’t support equal marriage either when CPs were being mulled.

  6. It’s a shame that he and his party want to treat the unemployed and lower paid as slaves though isn’t it?

    1. Indeed. Slavery is all right for the unemployed though. Once again, the Tory Party proving itself to worthy of the title of being Britain’s ‘nasty party’. They are repellent SCUM by blaming unemployment on the unemployed when the situation is that the vast majority of unemployed people WISH to work but are unable to find it because we have a weak economy which produces far fewer job vacancies than there are job seekers but the Tories won’t let a little FACT like that get in the way of their evil and relentless demonisation of the unemployed.

      Whatever happened to ‘one nation Toryism’? People like Winston Churchill, Anthony Eden, Harold Macmillian are probably turning in their graves as these goons trash any sense of social solidarity.

  7. Pseudo-marriage gets compared to abolition of slavery = bonkers tories out of touch and heading for election disaster

  8. can this man please speak to the new Australian PM !

  9. Colin (London) 5 Oct 2013, 9:18am

    I see what he was doing and applaud it. This is a land mark piece of legislation that was fought for. Many people up and down the country never mind in Parliament are still struggling with it. For us it’s common sense but for those of religious or different values it goes against all that they hold to be true. In my own extended family I have older parents and two sisters and a brother in law who teach in catholic schools. My sisters have gay children as I. However we after many years of denial have found our way through and become a better family, more compassionate, more of this world. But I can see in my parents eyes the guilt they feel just a little. They have gods I do not.

    For the Tories and it was this party who delivered it to us, this was a stretch and a worthy one. I hope in time all of Britain will be proud and the doubts vanish. I am against all religions now and will be until the end of my days. for me it’s get religion off this planet so we move on looking forward.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 5 Oct 2013, 12:25pm

      Well said, Colin. For those dissatisfied with the Tories, just remember, it wasn’t Labour who brought the legislation forward. Where were they for 13 years? I’m no Tory but I give full credit to them and the Liberal Democrats without whom the bill wouldn’t have existed and passed overwhelmingly.

      I for one never would have thought that even 126 Tories would have supported it, but they did. What was more surprising was the result in the Lords where support was even higher among many Tories I might add. People have short memories, not so long ago Labour was just as anti-gay. They of all people should have introduced it ahead of the other two parties but caved in to religious bigots and gave us an alternate union with a different name unique only to the UK but which have no full parity outside of the country the number of rights they convey.

      Any positive comment by a Tory in regard to LGBTQ people is a good thing and should be welcomed, not criticised or derided. I commend Osborne.

    2. Philip Breen 5 Oct 2013, 7:05pm

      Colin, I am with you. I, too, come from a Catholic family and it isn’t easy culturally for me because the set of values specific to that background can become the elephant in the room, despite the kindness younger family members show. Nonetheless, I wish the Tories would finish the job by organising a realistic and effective filtering of the old gay offences instead of surreptitiously allowing gays to be considered likely paedophiles for the purposes of strategic Safeguarding which, sadly, is currently the case. Sensible filtering would release many from their burdens & enable gay men convicted by the old police entrapment to start a new chapter that would free them to contribute and volunteer in society which, as yet, they effectively can’t.

      1. Colin (london) 7 Oct 2013, 10:22am

        Good point. I had not thought of that. I will write to the Chief of Police (think it’s Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe but will check) and ask what is the current status on this and if there are any plans to change this.

        1. Philip Breen 7 Oct 2013, 5:46pm

          Excellent. Let’s hope for progress. The attempt to ‘disregard’ convictions rolled out on 1.10.12 has helped little because so few qualify for ‘disregarding’ because the old cottaging offences are still comprised by the 2003 “sexual activity in a public lavatory”. The issue now is the inclusion of the gay offences, soliciting, indecency etc among “those offences that must always be disclosed”. The excuse, guided by the working party led by Sunita Mason who had advised all sexual offences be disclosed, is that in a minority of cases minors had been targeted. For at least 25 years, legislation has been in place to charge someone specifically with underage offences if relevant. It should be easy to check police records to establish minors were not involved in a case and so to recognise no need to disclose. Stating that hypothetically there could have been children would logically require blanket disclosure of speeding offences because a child might have run in front of the speeding car.

  10. I seem to recall 30 years of Tory opposition to any further concession to gay rights from 1979.
    I lived through clause 28, the afrAIDSs era, the refusal to support age of consent, civil partnership, Tory rebellions in the House of Lords and the infernal rants of peers such as Tebbit equating gay people with a threat to children and family if not nation. The ratio for this history is 30 years against gays to 3 years for – that is a Tory hisotrical ratio of 10 to 1 against gay rights

  11. Fool 400 years of barbarism is not comparable. I done remember gay people being transported around the world tortured raped murdered

    1. No they hadn’t. But that’s not to say that homosexuals haven’t suffered equally as bad in different ways, and over a longer period.
      Gays have been tortured and executed by their own governments, not someone else’s. As late as the 1950s, Gay men were chemically castrated and imprisoned…in ENGLAND!
      They still hang homosexuals in many nations, degrade and humiliate them – prison guards raping them by shoving brush handles forcefully into their anuses. Mutilate their genitals, and many other sickening acts. And this has been going on for thousands of years, not a couple of hundred. Slavery is now illegal in every nation on Earth. Homosexuality is still illegal in more than half.
      Women, Jews and atheists have suffered with similar atrocities, too. How blacks were treated in the slavery era, is inexcusable, but don’t for a moment think they’re unique in minority groups being tortured.

      1. Black & Gay 5 Oct 2013, 8:06pm

        Homosexuals haven’t suffered equally as bad, they where never taken from their lands and forcibly had there identify stolen and their heritage almost wiped out, given different names so they lose parts of themselves. homosexuals have suffered but its ridiculous to claim they have suffered equally as bad.
        True black people are not unique in being tortured, but the type of torture is completely different and blacks, native Americans and women have had it worst through out history

        1. And blacks were never taken from their families by their *own* governments for the simple crime of loving someone of the same sex.
          There’s no level of cruelty that backs have suffered, that homosexuals haven’t.
          Yes, being sold to foreign slave lords is disgusting. But so is being imprisoned, castrated, mutilated and raped by your fellow countrymen, before being hanged, or beheaded. This has been going on thousands of years, not a couple of hundred, either.
          Not that I’m excusing the brutal slave trade inflicted on Africans, but to ignore the similar levels of brutality and cruelty inflicted on homosexuals, is pure ignorance.

          1. Robert in S. Kensington 6 Oct 2013, 2:07pm

            And one very important fact or two that people have missed is that religion also played an integral part in the discrimination against gay people throughout it’s brutally savage history. Don’t forget that the bible condoned slavery. Don’t forget, the CoE supported it up until the early part of the 20th century as well as opposed women’s suffrage. We have indeed suffered just as much as Africans if you look at the history of human civilisation since monotheism took root and we still are. We are also discriminated against by African fundamentalists (Black southern Baptists in America come to mind) and other fringe religious sects and cults. Ironic that they now discriminate and support it against another group of people who happen to be gay and importantly, of every skin hue under the sun, even their own ethnic group.

          2. Black & Gay 6 Oct 2013, 9:20pm

            Not true at all blacks have had their own country stolen from them and their resources stolen, remind me of when this has happened to homosexuals oh wait there is no solely homosexual country. blacks have been imprisoned simple for drinking form the same water fountain, they have been castrated, mutilated and our females have been raped, Africa has been attacked and our people have been taken as slaves for thousands of years, it just became more profitably a couple of hundred years ago which is something i cant remember gay people going through, where people actual put a price on your lives, where you was only worth a certain amount,where they were someones property not even human. like i said i know homosexuals have suffered but to simple say the suffering is equal is idiotic

          3. Black & Gay 6 Oct 2013, 9:38pm

            Religion has played an integral part in discriminate of both gay and black people, and in what i said before you have not suffered just as much, you have indeed suffered but not as equally as you try put, also as much as i agree with the African fundamentalist idea, i remind you that not all gay people are as liberal as the LGBT community likes to pretend ive seen racism and other forms of discrimination from gay people even against Bi-sexuals and transsexuals, how can you call yourself a community when your not as united as you pretend and may i remind you, who introduced the idiotic notion of Christianity to Africa!

        2. I think the genocide that has been enacted against LGBT people around the world for 1700 years, that continues with every suicide, every murder in new york city or liverpool, every hanging in Iran, cannot be under estimated.

          1. Black & Gay 6 Oct 2013, 9:26pm

            Im not under estimating it, im simply stating they are not equal even if you compare numbers, a entire continent stolen from the inhabitants to how may people even today africa is stil exploited.

          2. If the entire continent was “stolen”, who’s in charge now? Why was there a slave market in Ghana in 1912? Who sold the slaves to the European and Arab traders? Do you also consider Islamic conquest of parts of Africa “stealing”, and if not, why not?

          3. Black & Gay 7 Oct 2013, 10:35pm

            Whos in charge now, well i can say politicians but truthfully its the christian leaders.
            The slave trade in Ghana was not based around racial issues,it was the same as what the Romans and Greeks did, after wars people on the losing side where sold as slaves, what Europeans did was go to the continent look at the inhabitants and judge they where inferior and even tried to justify it using there stupid book
            and yh i do consider it stealing.

          4. Are you suggesting that [war-booty] slavery that has no racial element is somehow less unacceptable? In any event, among every other culture in history that practised some form of slavery (which is pretty much every recorded one) the Greeks were certainly not all comfortable enslaving other Greeks, and the Arabs traded in Sub-Saharan Africans in a way they didn’t with other Arabs. You will note it’s the British who lead the move for abolition.

            Are the Christian – or Muslim – leaders of Sub-Saharan African countries not black, then? Are they not responsible for their own actions?

          5. Black & Gay 8 Oct 2013, 9:30pm

            no im not suggesting that but lets look at facts, Romans and Greeks both allowed masters to release slaves and they could go on to live their own lives, i cant remember that happening to black people, and even if they were”freed” could they go about living their lives no, because of skin tone.
            by greeks do you mean when the spartans enslaved the surrounding cities or when the Athenians did the same, and by arabs when the Persians conquered large parts of the arab world and enslaved alot?
            it may be true the British did lead the move for abolishing slavery, if we dont take into account the number of black people who said enough is enough. but whats the saying about a guilty conscious.
            hmm well yh but dont forget the old white guy in the dress in rome

  12. William Wilberforce sat as an Independent MP, and the abolition of slavery came under not a Tory, but Whig government.

  13. Mean while the tory party are beavering away to remove all safeguards for the defence and safeguarding of your human and civil rights, by removing the UK from the protections of the EHRC, the Human Rights Act, the public sector equality duty and otherwise mucking about with the Equality Act to water down its protections, they have already emasculated the Human rights Commission and removed most of its funding, do not be fooled while George is biging up their support of Same-sex Marriage they are doing all they can to remove protections to ensure those equal rights are realised in practice, and don’t get me started on their demonising of the disabled and young people and their making it harder to get a decent education if you are a pleb. A classic case of look, look over here, while we shaft you.

  14. Dislike the new web design and the comments section is way harder to read and to use. needs further revision to make it usable and intelligible.

  15. How ironic that this man is about to make me a SLAVE by forcing me work for free in order to claim job seekers allowance.

    1. Then you’re not working for free, you’re getting an allowance in exchange.

      Job seekers allowance is not a right, it’s a necessity for those who don’t or won’t work.

      I think you should look up the definition of slavery to understand it doesn’t work in this context, whether you’re a Labour support or a Conservative

      1. Bollocks, I look hard for work and the crappy job market is not my fault. I shouldn’t have to pick up litter or work in pound land for no wage to “boost my self esteem”. That is slavery. Labor for nothing in return is slavery. You’re clearly a privileged person who has probably never experienced the poverty or debt I am currently experiencing.

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.