Support for the Family: Defending David Kurten

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. Stuart Parr says:

    Trying to give his comments a veneer of credibility by pretending it’s scientific. He says there’s no gay gene that says whether someone is attracted to the same sex. There’s no Marmite gene either. Religious intolerance has no place in UKIP, we are not a religious party.

  2. Naomi says:

    I would remind you that UKIP was the only party that stood against homosexual ‘marriage’ so called, rightly so in my opinion. Buggery can not consulate a marriage only the union of a man and a woman can do that, the rest is a farce. It is simple biology, rather like gender, you are either born male or female, the rest is a mental illness as was so wisely said by Conservative County Councillor, as Family Spokesman for the group Grass Roots Conservatives, Mrs Mary Douglas on Radio 4 a couple of weeks ago. Why isn’t UKIP so sensible ?

    • John Gilday says:

      Tell me, Naomi. What is it about homosexuality that repulses you? In your mind, why is this ‘buggery’ in such poor light? Why, in your considered opinion, had two men or two women ought not to be entitled to the same property and inheritance rights, and rights to a legal bond as a man and a woman? Is it “Because we’ve always done it?” Is it some half baked theological reason that you couldn’t explain properly? I’m curious, please.

  3. John Gilday says:

    Hi Alan. Interesting read (your style and structure is much better organised than my own essays here) with some good research into the history of us poofs and some of the arguments made in the past. I’m not entirely sure I can agree on the genetic theories, but I’m not sure any of that is relevant. I wonder if you could clarify without ambiguity, what your personal position on same sex marriage is? I used to be very skeptical myself, and shared the very same view – ‘between a man and a woman’. In recent years, however, after coming to terms with myself and speaking to many others of similar and wildly different views and experiences, I can certainly no longer hold the view myself. I see no real case to be made against same sex marriage, beyond the traditionalist approach, which hardly seems relevant either. And beyond rhetoric, I’m not entirely sure I see one here either. There may be something I missed, of course. The only arguments I tend to hear from others within the party is, excuse my terseness, theological bullshit about sin, with no basis in reality at all, not even the pretence of pseudoscience. I’d be interested to discuss it with you.
    Kind regards.
    John Gilday

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *