I don’t agree with Richard Littlejohn that a man & woman would necessarily raise a child better than a gay couple. But he is entitled to express his opinion in our free country, and his opinion is not homophobic. CenterParcs need to get a grip.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43093154 …
-
-
Well, we're both educated people here and know what was really intended by that headline. It was meant to cause controversy, and it did. Some advertisers don't want to aline to that - which is their prerogative.
-
Littlejohn/Julia etc have controversy as their stock in trade. No controversy, no income. Hence all this.
-
Good point. Just wondering whether the controversy, particularly where Littlejohn is concerned was about issues facing his own ilk. It's always pointing fingers at the "other".
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
-
Yet, you disagree that the article is homophobic. The definition of homophobia is a dislike or prejudice of homosexuals. Let’s move onto the definition of prejudice, which is a preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience. So pretty much the article, no?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'm a homophobe but I can't 'come out' as such as it's illegal. Yet I don't go round spreading AIDs & other STD's due to anal sex rupturing membranes. Poor kid no balanced mum & dad parents. Surrogate's a whore for flogging her child. Also this will spread their faulty gay genes!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It is blatantly obvious which meaning he intended the word to have. This wasn’t an article to discuss statistical data on how children are conceived.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.