Politicians sex lives?

[Goodsoulette]

What the hell does it matter if an MP, party leader or prime minister is gay, straight or bi-sexual? I cannot believe in 2006 this is a "problem" that is being discussed in national newspapers, if i was unsure of employing someone to serve customers cause they were gay, i would be had up.

Leave them alone.

[AliFlump]

I agree, surely we need people from all walks of life in the government. They rule the country afterall and should represent everyone that lives in it.

[Oneeyedvic]

There is no issue with him being gay.

There is an issue with him running as a 'straight' candidate against a gay labour candidate.

There is also an issue with him lying - when asked by a 'friendly' newspaper the question, instead of being truthful he decided to lie.

That is in the public interest and there is no way I could vote for him

[AliFlump]

With who being gay? Goodsoulette didnt mention a name. she (i assume) says 'Leave THEM alone'

[WoWo]

In all the recent cases the fact they are gay isn't actually the issue. The issue is that they have been leading a "secret life" hidden from the public or more importantly their partner.

Mark Oten had an affair with a man without his wife's knowledge, therefore he has a history of lying and (according to the papers) cannot be trusted in a position of power.

Simon Hughes had previously denied being gay (or at least said he wasn't not sure of the context or the actual question). Again this points to a history of lying .

I don't think that there wouldn't be as much fuss if they had hetrosexual affairs. The point is that they have been lying and thats the issue the fact it's lying (or hidding) a gay affair is not really the issue.

Having said all that it doesn't bother me and I'd vote for either one of them.

[Drusilla]

I think Simon Hughes problem centres on press claims of hypocrisy and lying.

Many years ago, he was part of a foul, homophobic campaign by the Liberal Democrats (Liberals at the time) against a gay Labour candidate called Peter Tatchell. Simon Hughes won the seat.

I think it is fair to point out, times were different and the visible gay community of today was not as accepted by our society and this factor was played on, ruthlessly.

As for the story's importance today, well, I never under estimate the ability of the British press to sink lower in to the mire to seek truth, justice and diddly doo.

[ianess]

Very true Drusilla. Sexual preferences shouldn't come into it. To me the big problem is being deliberately lied to. Surely anyone with any sense firstly wouldn't lie and secondly wouldn't go into such a public position where the hypocrits would be looking to put the knife ion at every opportunity.
Yes Minister was funny at the time but it seems to be too close to the truth to be comfortable these days.

[Tock389]

I hate to say it, but I think it is fascinating to know whether an MP is gay or not- the media will only follow stories that they think the public will like - it is known as "copy tasting". I certainly don't think it should be an issue, but it is clearly in the public interest.

He did lie, too....hardly trustworthy, is he?

[flip-flop]

Oh come on, are people really surprised that Simon Hughes is gay??? I always thought it was quite apparent!

His sexuality does not make one jot of difference, and what he has done bears no resemblance to Oaten. No, it doesn't.

Your sexual preference should not matter a bit irrespective of whatever career you choose - my only caveat would be, be honest about it: if being gay is no longer a taboo, why lie about it?

If Oaten would rather jump into bed with a couple of rent boys than his Mrs, well fair play to him, but DON'T allow the cameras into your house to show what a great family man you are. Because you are not.

[Goodsoulette]

Its fair enough to be interested in what sexuality someone is but to base your vote on it is ludicrous, that is why politicians feel obliged to lie.

[Oneeyedvic]

So if a politician will lie to tell you what you want to hear ........

[Goodsoulette]

Lying about being gay is not important, we live in a society that you know as well as I would judge him on his sexuality,

Lying about having an affair is different, there is a moral issue there. You should not cheat on your wife, you should not have sex with prostitutes or snort cocaine. There is no err in being gay, yet if a gay man wants to keep his sexuality to himself that is his business.

What if he was asked if he masturbated ? and lied about that and somehow got caught out, is that important to whether you will vote for them? Something that is none of our business and damned well should not have been asked in the first place,

[BigMac]

The difference lies in the phrases "in the public interest" and "what interests the public".

There is no public interest in an individual's sexuality; the public (through the medium of - predominantly - the red tops and the Mail) is extremely interested in others' sexuality... there lies the dichotomy. Let's examine the behaviour of the editors/journalists and see how many scandals we can uncover. For example: didn't the Sun run a campaign against domestic violence but fail to cover the arrest of its own Editor?

There is an issue of hypocrisy, where, for example, an MP or political party states that xyz is the 'correct' way of living but at the time practises abc instead. That's why the predominantly heterosexual scandals of the Tories in the 1990s were so unpalatable.

Gay/bi/straight, catholic/protestant/jew/muslim/hindu, black/white/yellow, rich/poor... insert any one of these words and ask yourself: should we refuse to vote for her/him because of it? I think not.

Let's grow up. The Oaten case is sad for the family concerned, and Hughes is single, but really it is none of our business.

[Oneeyedvic]

A reporter is free to ask he question and (as with David Cameron), the politician is free to answer the question how he chooses - and the paper should report it as such and let the public make their own view.

What should not be tolerated is a politician lying and misleading people.

[bernardo]

Simon Hughes did not lie. He told the truth, but in a way which was "misleading". He was truthful when he said that he is not gay, because he is bisexual.

Mark Oaten's situation was relevant to his job because he was the shadow Home Affairs spokesman.

[joko]

it shouldn't matter, but to some stupid people it does and thats why they don't tell anyone

if someone stranger walked up to me and asked me my sexual preference, i would tell them to mind their own business. It is no-ones business so they are not obliged to tell anyone.

look what happened to kennedy when he "told the truth"...

[Ward-Minter]

haven't got a problem with gay men but wouldn't want one leading the country. Not that the libs will ever get to power, but surely that's the ultimate aim.

I think you really need a man's man to rule Great Britain and with a homosexual you just aren't going to get that. Although the second greatest leader we had was Baroness Thatcher she did have balls of iron.

[Oneeyedvic]

WM - that is because you are a bigotted prick

[Ward-Minter]

sorry to offend you Mr Vic. I mean no offence to you nor anybody else.

[Goodsoulette]

Ward- Minter - i think you knew full well that comment was going to cause upset. Gay people have to have balls of iron too you know to put up with the idiots that treat them like second class citizens.

[joko]

ward minter - we have had enough of 'mens men', they eff it up every time - we need a womans woman, not a woman who has male geniatalia!

you are going to be the the one who gets bumped off in my story - found in a compromising position and dressed as woman! - lol ;o)