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 …
-
-
That said, the word “normal” is not one I would use. As I said, I disagree with his views on this. But he is entitled to express them.
-
I haven't said he is not entitled to express his views. I understand the concept of freedom of speech and the reaction to his column, whatever it is, does not affect his right to it.
-
When she’s out of an argument she just regurgitates that line
-
All of this is just attention seeking from Katie Hopkins v2.
-
She's a poundshop hatie kopkins
-
This Tweet is unavailable
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
The vast majority of children are not born to a dad whose name Barry. But you wouldn't write "Let's not pretend having a dad whose name is Barry is normal" would you.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"Common" and "normal" aren't synonyms, which as a journalist you (should) know full well.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
As a journalist, I am sure that you know that “normal” can mean either “socially acceptable” or “the usual”. Since no-one is advocating that heterosexuals should give up having children, that rules out the latter, which only leaves the former. But nice try with the casuistry.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The opposite of normal is abnormal. Something not normal is abnormal, hence the view that RL used the word deliberately in a pejorative sense. Which, of course, he and the Daily Mail did.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Since when has the word "normal" been objective?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Also, you “forgot” to answer his question. It didn’t seem like a difficult question. Go ahead.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
What utter bollocks. You know full well “factually” doesn’t come in to it. The tone and insinuation are what causes the damage. If you would consider the Mail to be a factual publication you are monumentally ignorant.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Julia if that statement is something we all know then & is an obvious fact then why use it? He was using normal not in a statistical sense but as in not normal = abnormal. Your equivocation is all the the more sad as you know exactly this is what he meant.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It's just an unnecessary thing to say, unless you have a deep rooted resentment for it. It's nobody's business. Stop imposing your opinions on others. That's what it is. Sometimes it's best just to keep your opinions to yourself.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This sums you up. You are asking to provide which parts suggest that. He does. You then say ‘er it’s factually right’
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Imagine you're 13 years old, you're gay and no one knows, you're feeling unsure about how to come out to your friends and family. Then you see the headline on a national newspaper that says 'Please don't pretend two dads is the new normal'. That's what's wrong with it.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.