Is it reasonable to equate gay marriage to inter-species relationships?

[sp1814]

This is something good old Melanie Philips alluded to in a recent article opposing gay marriages in the Daily Mail. Now Tory councillor James Malliff has taken up the cause:

http://www.guardian.c...ed-gay-marriage-tweet

Personally I don't get their point. Seems to be world of difference between walking down the aisle with someone of the same sex, to walking down the aisle with someone of a different species - for a start it would make the seating plan at thhe reception a nightmare.

Mental right wingers, or sensible conservatives (with a small 'c').

[sp1814]

shortstraw

You mIght not be 100% correct there. Well, at least the American Psychological Association might disagree with you:

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/abn/105/3/440/

[andy-hughes]

I have not referred to the Councillor as a closet Nazi, i have said that it is only OK to hold those views if you are a closet Nazi - which does not implicate him directly.

I have no knowledge that the Councillor is a closet Nazi - but he certainly holds the views of one, which is not the same thing.

I am debating on a debate site as a private individual. The Councillor is holding forth with his abhorent views on a public communications site designed to diseminate his views to the wider public, and he is paid as a Councillor, and a political party member - I am neither.

That's why I get to 'carefully' state my opinion, and can back it up, and he is a thoughtless nasty-minded bigot who has been rightly castigated for his behaviour.

[anotheoldgit]

andy-hughes

/// I have not referred to the Councillor as a closet Nazi, i have said that it is only OK to hold those views if you are a closet Nazi - which does not implicate him directly. ///

Since it was the councillor that held those views, then that person by the very fact that he held those views, means that you were referring to him as a closeted Nazi, no matter how you try to deny the fact.

Apart from that fact you now more openly state that he is also a 'thoughtless nasty-minded bigot'.

So you now labelled him 'a thoughtless nasty-minded, closeted Nazi bigot'.

Tut-TuT and all he made was a perhaps a thoughtless exaggerated comparison, but yours is much more directly offensive.

[jackthehat]

AOG - Many of the views you share with us are held by racists........are you finally admitting that you are a racist?

You can't have it both ways...

[andy-hughes]

Yes, but i am not a Tory councillor distributing my vile opinions by means of a message site designed to spread my words to as wide an audiendce as possible.

I expressed my opinion of the councillor - I stand by it

In my view your defence of him, and attempts to minimise the sheer nasty-minded attitude he displays do you no credit at all.

[jno]

Cameron sensibly does do his best to keep the more dinosaur-like Tories out of sight; he took advantage of the expenses scandal to dump quite a few of them last year. But there's always another one to be found trumpeting in the swamps somewhere.

[Ankou]

"surely we shouldn't be held to account for every little remark, to be pored over for slights or innuendo"

whyever not ?

the daily mail does it all the time. occasionally the ed bans it from answerbank (i know this from experience).

[jno]

I don't know why Melanie Phillips shouldn't be held to account for what she writes; it's her job. Likewise anyone else who hold a public position - such as a councillor - may reasonably expect the public to listen to what he says.

I suppose ths would also apply to Ankou in his role as National Treasure Third Class.

[Ankou]

apparently the ab ed thinks that sometimes my thoughts are harmful to sensitive eyes.

honestly? me? butter wouldn't melt etc etc

[Kromovaracun]

"We will soon all have to employ the services of a lawyer before we dare open our mouths. "

What rot.

The things we say have consequences - that is a whole different ball game to being persecuted. The tory party, like any party, has a right to determine what their party stands for politically and if it doesn't feel you share it, they have a right to ask you to retract if you want to keep your membership - it's entirely sensible. You can't just join the tory party and expect them to back you up on absolutely anything you say.

That doesn't mean you don't have a right to say it or that you have to keep a lawyer handy. This man is not being persecuted by the law - he's been asked to keep his views in line with the political position his party has chosen to represent. That does not mean he can't say it - just that he'd have to be outside of his party to do it.

It never fails to amaze me how people can read persecution and totalitarianism into anything they like.