Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

NOM President Brian Brown: We also oppose the redefinition of chairs

  • http://www.andiesplace.co.uk Andie Davidson

    Oh give us a break, while you engage your brain! Just because you never sat on a table once in a while or put your feet on a chair. You haven’t got a leg to stand on.

  • GulliverUK

    They are both furniture – a general term covering items which are different but related and included under a common term, just like marriage. Same with the term family, which includes a large number of variations, but are nonetheless all examples of families.

  • lohtar

    I am more and more enjoying this. anything the anti-gay loons say nowadays gets so blatantly absurd it actually works in our benefit, as their idiocy is well exposed.

    Only annoying there are still a few left who take this seriously and especially worried about youth having to deal with this, but in the long run this is a good thing.

  • George Penfold

    Chairs should have equality regardless of what type of chair it is, ANYONE should be allowed to sit in it !!!!

  • David_in_Houston

    This is the same type of stupid analogy that Rick Santorum has used: “You can call a paper towel a napkin, but it’s never going to be one…”
    Marriage is not the same concept as a piece of furniture. Straight people still know which gender they’re going to marry, even though gay couples can ALSO get married. Nothing has changed for them: straight men continue to marry straight women in states (and countries) with marriage equality. The fact that Brian is still married to his (emotionally damaged) wife proves that same-sex marriage hasn’t impacted his life at all.

    • misfit44

      Yes it has. It has degraded it because in order to be equal or rather the same,. Straight marriage has dumb down. No more monogamy. No more faithfulness. No more meaning of the complementarity of husband and wife or father and mother.

      It is like saying the paraplegic rugby is exactly the same as able bodied rugby. The rules will have to change in order to accommodate for disabled sportsmen into the same team. In order to make blind people equal to sighted people the latter will have to be blinded.

      • Martin

        You need to get out more. There’s a whole world out there.

      • Rumbelow

        And then you get stupid couples who marry and intelligent couples who marry, must we dumb down all marriage to suit only the stupid couples when marriage can be so much more than the stupid couples are capable of understanding?

      • Carl

        What does monogamy or faithfulness has anything to do with equal marriage? Ridiculous!

        • misfit44

          You have just answered your own question. Same sex marriage has nothing to do with monogamy or faithfulness. It is adulterous and promiscous

          • Martin

            You want to cut down on the caffeine.

          • Lee W Dalgleish

            What a load of BS! People get married because they love each other and they want to commit to each other. It has everything to do with monogamy and faithfulness. Why on earth would people get married if they wanted to be adulterous or promiscuous? That just makes no sense at all.

      • Sarah L Nield

        You came out with a statement;

        Straight marriage has dumb down.

        What you could be saying;

        Marriage without any bends or curves has lowered itself and can no longer speak.

        Think about it.
        As others have noticed and noted, the meaning of words can change. It doesn’t stop the object or subject changing in itself.

        As for comparing LGBT people with the disabled, please don’t. Some LGBT people have disabilities, just like straight people. But for LGBT in general the only disability is from the attitudes of people who want to hold us back.

      • David_in_Houston

        “No more monogamy. No more faithfulness.”

        Says who? I’ve been in a faithful monogamous same-sex relationship for over 18 years. The sexual orientation of the couple has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the couple involved is going to be monogamous. It’s also laughable to imply that 5% of the populace is controlling the actions of the other 95%. Google search: “Newt Gingrich” to find out the meaning of adultery. Google search: “Rush Limbaugh” to find out the meaning of non-procreative serial marriage.

        “No more meaning of the complementarity of husband and wife or father and mother.”

        Procreation is not, and has never been a requirement to getting married. Otherwise, according to your ideology, the elderly, the infertile, and those not wanting children, would not be allowed to marry. For 95% of the populace, marriage will still be the so-called “complementarity of husband and wife”. In other words, your definition of marriage is simply a sex act and nothing more. For the vast majority of people, marriage is much more than that.

        Your rugby analogy fails. Marriage is a two-person ‘sport’. If a paraplegic couple were somehow playing rugby, it would have no effect on the other two-person teams that are also playing rugby on their own.

  • Leonard Woodrow

    BB should buy himself a dictionary.

    Merriam Webster dictionary definition of marriage :-.

    a (1) : the state of being united to a PERSON of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a PERSON of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional MARRIAGE

    • misfit44

      So it means if the law says that the sun is the moon and the moon is sun, then you would go along with that?

      • Martin

        Words change meaning all the time.

  • Bikerman

    This moron has the intellectual rigour of a gnat

  • Cal

    Hmm. What a great analogy. He sounds soooo intelligent.

    • Rumbelow

      Brian Brown is President of NOM, what a magnificent lifetime achievement, poor sod.

  • lee

    lol -it’s hard to believe people reach such positions in organisations. I wonder if he is a member of mensa? Not.

  • Rumbelow

    My late partner was chair at a leading university, I’m concerned that this is going to turn into a homophone debate for NOM.

  • Halou

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ab13m5g59Mg/UTaaWg75oSI/AAAAAAAAUVI/SuWlNyB0Mp8/s1600/Shelter.jpg
    So NOM will be out protesting in or around this field then, and demanding the horses all go to prison for ruining their precious chairs?

    • Rumbelow

      This looks to me like both chairs and tables redefined as horse stables, yes quick … call NOM.

  • Rumbelow

    Artist and Royal Academician Allan Jones seems to have redefined chairs and tables and other chattels (possibly a hat stand).

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/ce/Allen_Jones_Chair_Table_Hat_Stand_1969.jpg

  • misfit44

    Brian Brown is absolutely correct. If a man can have sex with bicycle why not have with a chair? Or even with cross Welsh Dresser?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1569272/Man-who-had-sex-with-bicycle-sentenced.html

    Or why shouldn’t a woman marry a bridge?

    http://metro.co.uk/2013/07/04/i-pronounce-you-bridge-and-wife-woman-marries-600-year-old-french-bridge-3869214/

    I thought it was against the law to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.

    And as we know there are plenty more letters left in the alphabet apart from LGBT

    There is LGBTQI and then three must LGBTQIO, with O for objectionumsexual:

    http://www.ranker.com/list/13-people-who-married-inanimate-objects/jude-newsome

    • Sarah L Nield

      Brian Brown is not absolutely correct!
      Unless of course you want to marry an inanimate object, something he nor any of NOM have ever advocated.
      I assume you are being sarcastic, if not I suggest you try and form a lobbying group for people who want to marry inanimate objects.
      Because we gays have got our marriage equality.
      All the luck to you!

  • UglyGeezer

    But an idiot will always be an idiot

  • Rumbelow
    • RightRevJim

      You win the internet today!

      • Rumbelow

        Thank you so much.

  • Steven Gregory

    What an imbecile.

    If someone calls a “table” a “chair,” it indicates they may be new to English or have special needs; but it in no way demeans either piece of furniture or renders it meaningless… and you can sit on either.

    What the NOMskull has done is underscore the silliness of his crusade.

  • Aron Sasportas

    Brian Brown is committing the fallacy known in logic as the false analogy.

  • Martin

    Armchair, Chesterfield chair, deck chair, high chair, push chair, wheel chair, Sedan chair, Queen Anne chair… All of them chairs just different types.

  • Sarah L Nield

    I have written to NOM on this subject:

    I am fifty years old. In the small northern English market town where I was growing up in the 1970s, amongst us kids, smart meant something that grabbed the attention in a pleasant way, as in ‘have you seen that film Star Wars. Yeah, it’s dead smart’.
    Even now when I see the word smart, I don’t think intelligent, I think interesting, exciting. In fact, when I use the word smart now I mostly mean that, which can be confusing amongst my teenage nieces and nephews!
    When my parent’s generation want to convey the same meaning they say ‘grand’, as in, “eh, holidays to Morecambe are grand!”
    The meaning of words change. You could say words evolve, that is they adapt to their users use.
    If enough people decided that the words chair and table could be exchanged, so each object is renamed for the other, where is the harm?
    Besides something solid and tangible doesn’t have to be renamed, where an idea like marriage can easily stretch to adopt two members of the same gender.
    Where is the harm?

    One more thing;
    Have you ever heard someone so completely, thoroughly bested in an argument that they have no comeback at all? If they haven’t got the humility and courage to admit they are mistaken they do exactly what Brian Brown is doing, they stutter and splutter and say anything, anything at all, just to attempt to regain ground they in all reason should have vacated a long while back.

  • Jordan Mykal Cross

    And this is why they are losing the gay marriage debate lol. Be GLAD that people arguing against gay marriage look am sound this stupid. It is what is causing even the REPUBLICANS to side with us.

  • RightRevJim

    I believe in the traditional Biblical definition of marriage. Marriage is between one man and as many women he can afford or steal in war and rape.

  • Dermot Mac Flannchaidh

    His argument reads like word salad.

  • metta8

    Suppose you called a black person and a white person human? Looks like everything is fine…just like every country and state that has legalized marriage equality. ;)

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