This is beggars belief! Surely that phrase would be used to define someone who wished to impose their own personal bigotry and restrict adoption?!?
Whatsmore, using the word Nazi so needlessly is going to cause the utmost offence to a lot of people. How did the Mail react to Ken Livingstone’s careless remarks?
If I funded the Mail, Id pull that funding over this (a) stupid and (b) offensive headline.
So I won’t even dive into the subject matter of gay adoption…
It has been long time since the Nazi word was on the front page. Apparantly, The Mail wanted to sponsor one of Hitlers rallies in the 1930s, but he turned them down as he felt they were obnoxious little Englanders.
The only problem adoptive gay couples have run into that directly relates to their homosexuality is societal bigotry, so retarded homophobe sounds about right.
The Mail is probably just letting off steam because it couldn’t run its ‘homosexuals killed Baby P’ headline. It’s already tried the ‘marriage would have saved Baby P’ angle.
Glad to see the Daily Mail is back on classic form. It’s wrong to use the term “homophobe”, but branding people Nazis is okay?
And let me get this straight – a paper that regularly whines about supposed “political correctness” is now whining about the use of the term “homophobe”? Oh dear, I guess it’s different when it’s the poor liddle Daily Mail.
Personally I think the Daily Mail are homophobic Nazis.
And I think they’re “retarded” too – I missed that bit. Perhaps the Daily Mail would be less offended if we called them intelligently-challenged homophobes instead?
Both The Express and The Daily Mail took a consistently pro-Nazi line right up until war was actually declared on Germany, and were in fact instruments of Nazi propaganda (some would say they still are). You would have thought that after this embarrassing blot on their past, they would steer well clear of any Nazi analogies, but no. Instead they devote themselves to trying to draw a clear blue line from Hitler all the way to Peter Tatchell.
@ Rothermere – that reminds of a programme I saw that interviewed Apartheid era South African Secret Police as part of the ‘Truth & Reconciliation’ program. They said that they had been amazed how some British newspapers would unquestioningly accept their fabricated stories – indeed, these newspapers seemed to be desperate to print anything pro-apartheid. The newspapers in question – the Daily Mail and the Daily Express.
“Whatsmore, using the word Nazi so needlessly is going to cause the utmost offence to a lot of people. How did the Mail react to Ken Livingstone’s careless remarks?”
Precisely, someone ought to take them to task for this. Disgraceful stuff, even by the standards of this rag.
Thats a really good point, they smeared Ken Livingstone over a stupid comment he made calling someone a Nazi who turned out to be Jewish, and said this “proved” his anti-Semetism, yet they use the same word in their headline?! Dont think thats a bit offensive to the Jews, Homosexuals, Slavs, Gypsies that were massacred by the Nazis. Who of course the Mail supported until Churchill no less had to censor their pro-Nazi ranting when the war started!
I put this up already on the Mail’s comments but I doubt it’ll be published:
I find it interesting that, upon looking through the comments (on the headline story), so many people have been rated dramatically low for recounting tales of having/being well-adjusted children from families in which the parents are gay. Why is that? Why are these people being victimised for having good lives? Can’t Daily Mail readers handle the fact that there are actually people in this world that will constantly prove them wrong?
This is beggars belief! Surely that phrase would be used to define someone who wished to impose their own personal bigotry and restrict adoption?!?
Whatsmore, using the word Nazi so needlessly is going to cause the utmost offence to a lot of people. How did the Mail react to Ken Livingstone’s careless remarks?
If I funded the Mail, Id pull that funding over this (a) stupid and (b) offensive headline.
So I won’t even dive into the subject matter of gay adoption…
I never knew the Nazis were so keen on gay rights. I guess those pink triangles were a mark of high status then, were they?
The paper’s reporting gets more bizarre by the week.
It has been long time since the Nazi word was on the front page. Apparantly, The Mail wanted to sponsor one of Hitlers rallies in the 1930s, but he turned them down as he felt they were obnoxious little Englanders.
It’s PC Nazis gone mad, never mind have a look at peaches tits and enjoy a nice game of 4D suduko!
The only problem adoptive gay couples have run into that directly relates to their homosexuality is societal bigotry, so retarded homophobe sounds about right.
The Mail is probably just letting off steam because it couldn’t run its ‘homosexuals killed Baby P’ headline. It’s already tried the ‘marriage would have saved Baby P’ angle.
This really is self-satirising, isn’t it?
Glad to see the Daily Mail is back on classic form. It’s wrong to use the term “homophobe”, but branding people Nazis is okay?
And let me get this straight – a paper that regularly whines about supposed “political correctness” is now whining about the use of the term “homophobe”? Oh dear, I guess it’s different when it’s the poor liddle Daily Mail.
Personally I think the Daily Mail are homophobic Nazis.
And I think they’re “retarded” too – I missed that bit. Perhaps the Daily Mail would be less offended if we called them intelligently-challenged homophobes instead?
Lol, ‘Adoption Nazis!” I’ve missed over the top headlines from the Mail. Its good to be back.
whereas:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1181448/Jonathan-Ross-new-row-homophobic-comments-Radio-2-show.html
Check out the front page article by Anton Vowl regarding what I like to call Naztards.
Both The Express and The Daily Mail took a consistently pro-Nazi line right up until war was actually declared on Germany, and were in fact instruments of Nazi propaganda (some would say they still are). You would have thought that after this embarrassing blot on their past, they would steer well clear of any Nazi analogies, but no. Instead they devote themselves to trying to draw a clear blue line from Hitler all the way to Peter Tatchell.
What a bunch of retarded homophobes.
A complete batshite comparsion.
And bar wank fodder is there any reason Peaches is wearing her Bikini.
@ Rothermere – that reminds of a programme I saw that interviewed Apartheid era South African Secret Police as part of the ‘Truth & Reconciliation’ program. They said that they had been amazed how some British newspapers would unquestioningly accept their fabricated stories – indeed, these newspapers seemed to be desperate to print anything pro-apartheid. The newspapers in question – the Daily Mail and the Daily Express.
Slurring Nazis?
“Whatsmore, using the word Nazi so needlessly is going to cause the utmost offence to a lot of people. How did the Mail react to Ken Livingstone’s careless remarks?”
Precisely, someone ought to take them to task for this. Disgraceful stuff, even by the standards of this rag.
Thats a really good point, they smeared Ken Livingstone over a stupid comment he made calling someone a Nazi who turned out to be Jewish, and said this “proved” his anti-Semetism, yet they use the same word in their headline?! Dont think thats a bit offensive to the Jews, Homosexuals, Slavs, Gypsies that were massacred by the Nazis. Who of course the Mail supported until Churchill no less had to censor their pro-Nazi ranting when the war started!
And that subheading about the speaker sounds like they’ve put out a Fatwa on him or something?
I put this up already on the Mail’s comments but I doubt it’ll be published:
I find it interesting that, upon looking through the comments (on the headline story), so many people have been rated dramatically low for recounting tales of having/being well-adjusted children from families in which the parents are gay. Why is that? Why are these people being victimised for having good lives? Can’t Daily Mail readers handle the fact that there are actually people in this world that will constantly prove them wrong?