You are a jackass Eagle
We are far in advance of America for treatment of gays and lesbians in the UK
We can get married here, and you can't unless you go to one of about 8 states
We can adopt, we don't have DADT in the army and we have gay politicians
We have had these for years while America is still challenging gay rights in court
Exactly what i'd expect from an American so far up his own arse he can't see what other countries are doing

Report this comment to us

And watching question time was a waste of time
Nick Griffin was a victim there and i felt appalled at the way he was treated, he is still an MEP and should have been asked about more of his policies
Labour even got an easy ride by only having to look good in comparison rather than answer for all the stupid things they do
I wouldn't be surprised if the BNP get more votes from Griffin's treatment

Report this comment to us

Report this comment to us

I asm sure they don't. I mean, why would anyone think that the act that gave them life, and gave life to themselvesch thirds, their friends and lovers, disgusting?
If that stops, there would be noone left !

Report this comment to us

Report this comment to us

Report this comment to us

Report this comment to us

Report this comment to us

Report this comment to us

Report this comment to us

RobN, the fact that many straight men are turned on by two women getting it on is a classic example of hetero hypocrisy and bigotry at its worst. Straights need to grow up and get over it, we're here and we're not going back in the closet, get used to it. We pay our taxes, fight in their dirty wars and even are killed in the process, we're every bit as good as they are and in many cases, a whole lot better! We don't form hate groups to discriminate against straights now do we, let alone take away or tamper with their rights no matter how we may disagree with them just because they're the majority, it doesn't make them right. Just because we're the minority doesn't wash any more and I for one refuse to be lulled into a false sense of inferiority because I'm gay and less than they are, nor will I act as their apologist, a trait of self-loathing.

Report this comment to us

Report this comment to us

Also, what the hell do you think free speech is, RobN? Griffin was allowed to speak his mind and insult us. Others were allowed to speak their minds and insult him. Free speech isn't about being protected for saying whatever you want, it's about having the responsibility to say whatever you want and then deal with the consequences. I thought you hated all this namby-pamby molly-coddling stuff? Free speech is not for cowards, so why does that not make you happy? I thought you didn't like cowards?

And the fact that the BNP-supporters were outnumbered, what would you have liked them to do? Make the audience pretend to be sympathetic? Artificially inflate the BNP nhumbers by having a set quota of audience members? Oh, wait! That's affirmitive action, and you hate that! Grr! Nasty minorities trying to be artificially equal!

Basically, you don't really want free speech, do you? You wanted Griffin to be able to lambast us all night long with everybody clapping and cheering, maybe even nestling up by his feet as if he's telling a bedtime story. You don't want free speech, you just want special treatment. Not for any old minority, just for you and those who share your opinions on various matters. All you want is revenge on us for daring to embarrass you in front of others.

Oh, and maybe a metre-high soap box contained in a protective perspex cube, a megaphone, an elite cadre of bodyguards with attack dogs, and gagging orders for anyone who so much as looks at you funny. Go on! Might as well treat yourself!

Report this comment to us

Why are so many of your posts so full of hatred? The fact that you assume anyone who disagrees with you is stupid says a lot about your own capacity for tolerance.

RobN: 'Well, sunshine, I've got news for you, we might want to be treated equally, but we will never *BE* equal because there are more of them than us.'

I'm glad homosexuals and their sympathisers didn't think in such a limited and defeatist fashion back in the 1950s, otherwise homosexuality would probably still be illegal. In 2009, if you add together everyone who isn't straight and everyone else who thinks that those people should have equal rights with heterosexuals, I'm pretty sure you'd have a statistical majority.

Report this comment to us

Report this comment to us

We have a national police force openly recruiting gays to join the force as well as a military that welcomes them with open arms, unlike the U.S. Plus, every gay couple has the right to adopt children, unlike the U.S. where there are bans on it and bans in 30 states or more on gay couples marrying or having their marriages recognised if performed elsewhere. American gay married couples don't even have federal recognition, how absurd and backward is that? Further, we don't have a lunatic right wing conservative group of religious bigots thwarting legislation and denying people a right to marry after legislation is passed allowing them to do just that. We're not a perfect, progressive society but a damn sight better in a lot of ways than the U.S. on social issues alone. We never had segregation of black people either or miscegenation laws prohibiting black people from interracial marriage either or the degree of hatred and divisiveness apparent in American society. Want to talk about backward thinking now? I think the shoe is on the other foot my friend.

Report this comment to us

Report this comment to us

That's because we are in a minority, you f_ckwit. Nobody is saying "Don't do it", but you like so many others demand explicit, rigid tolerance of all things gay, but are not prepared to tolerate even the slightest non-acceptance of anything that might not show LGBT people in a 100% good and equal light. Well, sunshine, I've got news for you, we might want to be treated equally, but we will never *BE* equal because there are more of them than us. That fact will never change. As I said in an earlier post, these things take time, and public opinions move and change, and in time, hopefully we will be seen on a par, but until then, stop automatically assuming because some may find us disturbing, it's not through any malicious reason, but because they don't know any better. Would you call a child that says "Ugh! Mummy! Look at that man with no arms and legs" cruel or malicious? No. They just need educating.

Report this comment to us

Now to the paedophile equation. Putting a cynical slant on this, in England, an underage child who has reached the age of 16 can with parental consent, marry. Exclude the marriage and a 16 year old of either gender having sex with an older person would be construed as a victim of paedophilia. Allowing underage children to marry is nothing more than state sanctioned paedophilia and would confirm that the overwhelming perpetrators of paedophilia are straights and their religious cults who are complicit in supporting such marriages.

Report this comment to us

The former BNP leader has got Nick Griffin down to a T and even mentions this in his website.

The 'gay' story

Well, it is interesting to learn that Nick Griffin these days considers defamation of himself a cause for action against the defamer, for this did not seem to be his attitude back in 1999, when a former high ranking National Front official, Martin Webster, put out a circular alleging a homosexual relationship between himself and Griffin back in the late 1970s. Webster, in doing this, challenged Griffin to take him to court for libel if the allegation was untrue."

Read it on this link spearhead.com/0310-jt2.html

What other party provides you with the info to bring them down.

Nick Griffin is just looking for something to justify his homophobia on. He knows that the question about homosexuality was where he really let the cat out the bag about his fascist manifesto on question time.

Report this comment to us