More crap from the Herald

I cant believe the stuff the Herald is printing. First they print a letter from Stephen D Taylor who said that Labour MP Tim Barnett should be "put down" like a rabid dog" - presumably because Tim is gay, and an MP with influence. The O'Herald had to apologise for running the letter.

Stephen D's response in an email to Barnett was thus: "The NZ Herald may have been forced into an apology Timmy, but Hell itself will freeze over before you hear one from me." (thanks to Russell Brown for the post.)

Nasty little boy. But then the Herald published this article from former Gay Express editor and Gaywatch member Claire Gummer ( who has been with her partner for nearly 15 years and plans a "united future" ) saying that opponents of civil unions are "gay-bashers in disguise".

Really? what about the gay opponents of civil unions - is Claire saying they bash their own?

Claire makes the point that, instead of gay-bashing, marriage should be strengthened by promoting it as a positive lifestyle choice. Good point if we all agree on what marriage actually is - or what constitutes a positive lifestyle choice.

Claire also says "many men and women who marry each other do so because they lack an alternative, rather than because they wish to tie the knot in the traditional way."

So who are these "many men and women"?

"This entry into matrimony by a host of reluctant recruits who would rather be elsewhere must surely weaken the structure of marriage."

Not in Helen Clark's case, apparently. Any examples?

Most opponents of civil unions are not gay-bashers. Those who say that civil unions undermine marriage will also say that heterosexual civil unions undermine marriage.

Does that make them gay-bashers? Of course not.