The Liberal Democrats and homosexuality
- Thread starter notb665
- Start date
Sponsored Links
theres no such thing as a bisexual, its gay greed 
is this a gay thing or can anyone chime in? I've been on this planet for a while now. Doesn't it ever get old chatting about one's sexual preference? I mean ....sooner or later, it's going to be something out there that sets one apart from others...or so it would seem and more and more people will identify with it and "come out" and that incites fear...and fear incites....well, fear will kill us all. eventually.
No - it's about his lies.notb665 said:
His "technically correct" statement was as truthful as Bill Clinton's "I did not have sex with that woman". Ask any married man or woman if they were caught receiving/giving a b-j if their spouse would not regard it as sex?
And just like old Slick Willy, if he'd come clean at the start, I'm sure he would have got away with it, politically.
Anyway - the fact that Simon Hughes had sex with women doesn't mean he isn't gay - he may have been in denial at the time.
Sponsored Links
He must have lied because there is still discrimination otherwise why bother, its hard to believe that in this day and age people have to hide or state their sexuality and how come no one asks or has to admit to being straight?
I,m guessing that as there's a wink on the end of this that its a joke? otherwise its yet another homophobic jibe.theres no such thing as a bisexual, its gay greed
I don't think it is, really.mlb3c said:
Background in a nutshell - the Liberal Party are the 3rd force in British politics, because of the way we count votes they never get the number of seats in Parliament that reflects their overall popularity, traditionally they have steered a middle course between the ostensibly right-wing Conservative Party and the ostensibly left-wing Labour Party (both of whom are however blurring the boundaries with their re-inventions), and are important for two reasons:
1) They stop either of the main parties from becoming too extreme, as they are an obvious home for moderate supporters to go to if they can't stomach the extremities - they provide a way for voters to punish a party, and cost them seats, without actually having to vote for their traditional opponents.
2) In a hung, or small-majority Parliament they can swing the balance between the two main parties by how they vote.
They recently lost their leader, because he was an alcoholic, and he lied about it, and in the last couple of weeks have lost two (or is it three? I've lost count) potential leadership candidates because of revelations about their past sexual activities, which they lied about.
I genuinely believe that most voters really don't give a stuff if a politician is gay or bisexual, it's the lying they can't stand..
Its also worth pointing out that when Simon Hughes first got elected as an MP, his opponent was Peter Tatchell, and he ran a fairly vigorous campaign where he made Tatchell's homosexuality an issue and sold himself as the 'straight choice'. I guess it is also easier to be openly gay now than at any time in history, so it does make you wonder why he kept denying it for so long, but in the main there hasn't really been much fuss about Simon Hughes' sexuality.
Mark Oaten is a different matter, and again the issue with most people isn't so much sexuality, rather than sheer stupidity. Given that he is a married father of two, it would raise most people's eyebrows if they then started an affair with a rent boy that they met on t'internet. The fact that he was the shadow home affairs spokesman for Britain's third party, that he was going to stand for the leadership, and hoped it would all stay quiet shows a lack of judgement that you usually have to rely on Blunkett for. As in that case, its the lack of judgement or ability to restrain yourself that worries people, rather than whether hie is gay, bi, or whatever...
Mark Oaten is a different matter, and again the issue with most people isn't so much sexuality, rather than sheer stupidity. Given that he is a married father of two, it would raise most people's eyebrows if they then started an affair with a rent boy that they met on t'internet. The fact that he was the shadow home affairs spokesman for Britain's third party, that he was going to stand for the leadership, and hoped it would all stay quiet shows a lack of judgement that you usually have to rely on Blunkett for. As in that case, its the lack of judgement or ability to restrain yourself that worries people, rather than whether hie is gay, bi, or whatever...
I never knew that. That's a bit below the belt.johnny_t said:
I feel sorry for Hughes but I think that he has shown weakness with his dishonesty and weakness and politicians don't mix well.
I also feel sorry for Oaten because he must have known that he has been walking a tightrope. His urges must have been very strong for him to put himself in such a precarious position. (No pun intended there!)
I also feel sorry for Oaten because he must have known that he has been walking a tightrope. His urges must have been very strong for him to put himself in such a precarious position. (No pun intended there!)
It would certainly raise mine if I found myself doing that....johnny_t said:
But as with lying ones, how many politicians are there who have at some time engaged the services of a prostitute?
Does the fact that Mark Oaten used a male prostitute make a difference?
If so, why?
Interesting. I guess that any prostitute use would be frowned upon - Jeffrey Archer and John Profumo spring to mind.
I suppose the key is that we can have any number of debates about whether people and the press should make a big issue out of politicians visiting prostitutes in their spare time, but the politicians need to accept that we are where we are and the press do, and just tie a knot in it once in a while. Or at least settle for shagging their secretary instead.......
I suppose the key is that we can have any number of debates about whether people and the press should make a big issue out of politicians visiting prostitutes in their spare time, but the politicians need to accept that we are where we are and the press do, and just tie a knot in it once in a while. Or at least settle for shagging their secretary instead.......
You bleeding well have....
Sponsored Links
