Winston McKenzie, the culture spokesman for UKIP, said placing children with gay or lesbian couples was "child abuse".

The former boxer, who is standing in the Croydon North by-election on Thursday, told the Metro newspaper: "To say to a child, 'I am having you adopted by two men who kiss regularly but don't worry about it' - that is abuse.

"It is a violation of a child's human rights because that child has no opportunity to grow up under normal circumstances."

http://news.sky.com/story/1016897/uk...is-child-abuse

Must be the way he interprets the Holy Bible. There are quite a few of these -*.!wits out there.

Of course he said it. He never denied it, just tried to vaguely blame "the press."

He was forced into admitting it by Gemma. He didn't admit he'd said the 'child abuse' bit to the house. But he did to Gemma.

He said it alright.

Its a stupid way to describe it. He should find a better way to put it or shut up.

To be fair their are a few scriptures that condemn homosexuality in the bible. It just many Christians pick and choose what they do and don't follow in the bible

He's got every right to think what he thinks but he should pick a less provocative way of explaining himself.

He doesn't seem like he can articulate himself properly though.

It's his opinion and if we believe in a free society we have to let others have their opinion as well. I agree that he could have used better language and I think he has realised that too but we all slip up and make a mess of what we say. I think as a general rule I would be more wary of someone who never slips up.

Why do people think that criticising someone's opinion means you have a problem with them having an opinion? It doesn't, it means you have a problem with the actual opinion. There's a big difference. I don't have a problem with Hitler having an opinion, but I do have a problem with the actual opinion that Jews are an inferior race that should be exterminated. Get the picture?

Found this , here he states the word abuse was the wrong word to use.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytiSr8UTZ6c

He's allowed opinions but others are allowed to disagree with his opinions.

Also it's opinions like Winston's that have meant thousands of children have gone without a home and grown up in the care system when a perfectly stable loving couple could have adopted them. Especially seeing as research has shown children of gay parents often go on to have normal happy lives.

It's not just about bashing someone's opinions it's about not letting someone's opinions ruin other peoples lives when the facts don't align with their opinion.

I haven't read all the study but I think you are wrong in your conclusion and the opposite is true . Just from their conclusion

"Conclusion

The articles by Marks and Regnerus have completely changed the playing field for debates about homosexual parents, "gay families," and same-sex "marriage." The myths that children of homosexual parents are "no different" from other children and suffer "no harm" from being raised by homosexual parents have been shattered forever."

All it shows is that it is a very difficult subject to understand and people whether pro or anti same sex parents raising children should not jump to hasty judgements .

Winston can barely string a sentence together and is all over the place with his 'opinions'

He's clearly more than just 'thick' and is probably somewhere on the mentally deficient scale

Why are his incoherent ramblings being given air-time ?

I should have thought the Pope holding similar views is a damn sight more significant

A little info about the Family Research Council, the linked website:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Research_Council

They are not to be taken seriously. They've been against LGBT rights for decades, they are a conservative Christian lobbying group in the US.

Also, the authors of that actual study admit that it wasn't done about gay parenting!


http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/1...gay-parenting/

I only just found out that he originally made the comment in 2012.
I can hardly believe that it's being dredged up again now as if he suddenly did something.
In the video he retracts what he said and says that he shouldn't have used the word......back in 2012.

So what on earth are BB playing at?

They're 'playing at' being some kind of standard bearer for the GLBLT community I think.

It struck me when they made Michelle Visage one of their darlings and applauded her grand-standing ... despite the fact that she actively excluded the only openly gay man in the house

His views are one which we don't agree with, however in his defence the guy was set up by CBB. We wouldnt have even been discussing this had BB not brought this into that task.

He gets evicted and then torn apart by not only Emma, but also the boo gate fans plus the CBB Bit On The Side studio.

Again i dont agree with his views but thy are his views, and it shouldnt have even been brought into the show by the Producers!

Please explain why not ? Surely any extreme views held by any HM should be made known .

Do we want all extremist views like racist, homophobic, fattist, ageist, misogynist etc., kept hidden ?