Almost half of HIV-positive gay men unaware, US study says

A US study estimates that almost half of HIV-positive gay and bisexual men are unaware they are infected.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study also suggested that one in five of gay men in cities most affected by HIV have the virus.

The research studied more than 8,000 gay and bisexual men in the 21 cities which have the highest HIV rates. They were given HIV tests by CDC researchers.

In Baltimore, 38 per cent of the men tested were found to be HIV-positive, while just six per cent in Atlanta tested positive.

The highest number of infections occurred in black gay and bisexual men. This group were less likely to be aware of their infection with 59 per cent unaware, compared to 46 per cent of Hispanic men and 26 per cent of white men.

Men under the age of 30 were significantly less likely to be aware of having HIV. Sixty-three per cent of HIV-positive gay and bisexual men between the ages of 18 and 30 did not know they had the virus, compared to 37 per cent of HIV-positive gay and bisexual men over the age of 30.

Dr Jonathan Mermin, director of CDC’s Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, told Reuters: “We can’t allow HIV to continue its devastating toll among gay and bisexual men, and in particular, among young black men.

“We need to reinvigorate our response to preventing HIV among gay and bisexual men.”

“The severity of the impact of HIV in the gay community is nothing new,” said Carl Schmid of the non-profit AIDS Institute.

“What has been missing is an appropriate response by our government, at the federal, state, and local levels, and the gay community itself.”

The research was published ahead of National Gay Men's HIV/AIDS Awareness Day, which is on Monday September 27th.

According to CDC, gay and bisexual men represent approximately two per cent of the US population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV and are the only risk group in which new HIV infections have been increasing steadily since the early 1990s.

Almost half of HIV-positive gay men unaware, US study says

A US study estimates that almost half of HIV-positive gay and bisexual men are unaware they are infected.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study also suggested that one in five of gay men in cities most affected by HIV have the virus.

The research studied more than 8,000 gay and bisexual men in the 21 cities which have the highest HIV rates. They were given HIV tests by CDC researchers.

In Baltimore, 38 per cent of the men tested were found to be HIV-positive, while just six per cent in Atlanta tested positive.

The highest number of infections occurred in black gay and bisexual men. This group were less likely to be aware of their infection with 59 per cent unaware, compared to 46 per cent of Hispanic men and 26 per cent of white men.

Men under the age of 30 were significantly less likely to be aware of having HIV. Sixty-three per cent of HIV-positive gay and bisexual men between the ages of 18 and 30 did not know they had the virus, compared to 37 per cent of HIV-positive gay and bisexual men over the age of 30.

Dr Jonathan Mermin, director of CDC’s Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, told Reuters: “We can’t allow HIV to continue its devastating toll among gay and bisexual men, and in particular, among young black men.

“We need to reinvigorate our response to preventing HIV among gay and bisexual men.”

“The severity of the impact of HIV in the gay community is nothing new,” said Carl Schmid of the non-profit AIDS Institute.

“What has been missing is an appropriate response by our government, at the federal, state, and local levels, and the gay community itself.”

The research was published ahead of National Gay Men's HIV/AIDS Awareness Day, which is on Monday September 27th.

According to CDC, gay and bisexual men represent approximately two per cent of the US population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV and are the only risk group in which new HIV infections have been increasing steadily since the early 1990s.

Anti-gay pastor Eddie Long vows to 'fight' gay sex claims

Eddie Long, the anti-gay leader of one of America's largest church congregations, has said he will fight allegations he coerced young men in his flock to have sex with him.

Last week, three young men filed lawsuits alleging that Mr Long gave them money, cars and holidays in return for massages, oral sex and masturbation.

The leader of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Atlanta, who preaches to 25,000 members, told his congregation on Sunday that he was "under attack" and would "fight" the allegations.

Speaking for the first time since the lawsuits were filed, he said: "I've been accused, I'm under attack.

"I want you to know, as I said earlier, that I am not a perfect man. But this thing, I'm going to fight," he said. "I feel like David against Goliath, but I've got five rocks and I haven't thrown one yet."

CNN reports that he left his pulpit to overwhelming applause.

Mr Long is apparently being supported by his flock. Few have spoken to the media and those who have spoken out declared his innocence.

The married father of four has a long history of preaching against gay rights and same-sex marriage and claims his church has "delivered" people from homosexuality.

The three men accusing him of sexual impropriety are Maurice Robinson, 20, and Anthony Flagg, 21, and Jamal Parris, 23.

All have waived anonymity and claim Mr Long seduced them when they were aged 17 or 18.

Anti-gay pastor Eddie Long vows to 'fight' gay sex claims

Eddie Long, the anti-gay leader of one of America's largest church congregations, has said he will fight allegations he coerced young men in his flock to have sex with him.

Last week, three young men filed lawsuits alleging that Mr Long gave them money, cars and holidays in return for massages, oral sex and masturbation.

The leader of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Atlanta, who preaches to 25,000 members, told his congregation on Sunday that he was "under attack" and would "fight" the allegations.

Speaking for the first time since the lawsuits were filed, he said: "I've been accused, I'm under attack.

"I want you to know, as I said earlier, that I am not a perfect man. But this thing, I'm going to fight," he said. "I feel like David against Goliath, but I've got five rocks and I haven't thrown one yet."

CNN reports that he left his pulpit to overwhelming applause.

Mr Long is apparently being supported by his flock. Few have spoken to the media and those who have spoken out declared his innocence.

The married father of four has a long history of preaching against gay rights and same-sex marriage and claims his church has "delivered" people from homosexuality.

The three men accusing him of sexual impropriety are Maurice Robinson, 20, and Anthony Flagg, 21, and Jamal Parris, 23.

All have waived anonymity and claim Mr Long seduced them when they were aged 17 or 18.

Humphrey Bogart slept with 1,000 women out fear he was gay

A new biography of Humphrey Bogart claims he slept with a thousand women, partly because he feared that he was becoming homosexual.

'Humphrey Bogart, the Making of a Legend' by journalist Darwin Porter claims that before the Hollywood star married actress Lauren Bacall in 1945, he had slept with an estimated 1,000 women including Bette Davis, Jean Harlow, Marlene Dietrich and Ingrid Bergman.

The book claims that the actor was tormented with a fear that he was becoming both impotent and homosexual. It also suggests that he considered killing himself during his second marriage

During the 1920s, while appearing on Broadway, it is claimed that Bogart slept with a different woman, nearly every night. "He was keeping score with his first wife, Helen Menken, who had a lot of lesbian affairs," said Mr Porter. "They were both chased by the same women, including Jazz Age star Louise Brooks and the flamboyant Tallulah Bankhead."

On-off girl friend Joan Blondel said: "The zipper was invented in 1926. Bogie demanded one be sewed into all of his pants — sex was a lot faster that way. He was a busy boy back then, and rather handsome before he lost his hair and his looks."

Humphrey Bogart slept with 1,000 women out fear he was gay

A new biography of Humphrey Bogart claims he slept with a thousand women, partly because he feared that he was becoming homosexual.

'Humphrey Bogart, the Making of a Legend' by journalist Darwin Porter claims that before the Hollywood star married actress Lauren Bacall in 1945, he had slept with an estimated 1,000 women including Bette Davis, Jean Harlow, Marlene Dietrich and Ingrid Bergman.

The book claims that the actor was tormented with a fear that he was becoming both impotent and homosexual. It also suggests that he considered killing himself during his second marriage

During the 1920s, while appearing on Broadway, it is claimed that Bogart slept with a different woman, nearly every night. "He was keeping score with his first wife, Helen Menken, who had a lot of lesbian affairs," said Mr Porter. "They were both chased by the same women, including Jazz Age star Louise Brooks and the flamboyant Tallulah Bankhead."

On-off girl friend Joan Blondel said: "The zipper was invented in 1926. Bogie demanded one be sewed into all of his pants — sex was a lot faster that way. He was a busy boy back then, and rather handsome before he lost his hair and his looks."

Adam Levine, lead singer of Maroon 5 says that Jake Gyllenhaal is not gay

The lead singer of Maroon 5, Adam Levine, came out in defense of his friend Jake Gyllenhaal.

Levine called it "childish and immature" the rumors about the sexuality of the star of "Brokeback Mountain."

During an interview, the musician spoke about the connection he has with Gyllenhaal. "Are people going to stop thinking that the guy is gay?" Said Levine. "Seriously, the media is very immature to say that he is gay - that's because he did 'Brokeback', right? I know this guy long ago. He is one of my oldest friends, is very strange to think so - is immature and child the way they treat this issue, "he complained.

The singer added: "If because he goes out with friends means he is gay, is as strange to perpetuate homophobia that exists in our culture, which is just stupid. Well, he's my friend. And I love him. "

Source: Scene G

Adam Levine, lead singer of Maroon 5 says that Jake Gyllenhaal is not gay

The lead singer of Maroon 5, Adam Levine, came out in defense of his friend Jake Gyllenhaal.

Levine called it "childish and immature" the rumors about the sexuality of the star of "Brokeback Mountain."

During an interview, the musician spoke about the connection he has with Gyllenhaal. "Are people going to stop thinking that the guy is gay?" Said Levine. "Seriously, the media is very immature to say that he is gay - that's because he did 'Brokeback', right? I know this guy long ago. He is one of my oldest friends, is very strange to think so - is immature and child the way they treat this issue, "he complained.

The singer added: "If because he goes out with friends means he is gay, is as strange to perpetuate homophobia that exists in our culture, which is just stupid. Well, he's my friend. And I love him. "

Source: Scene G

Activist creates YouTube channel for the gay cause

The issue of gay activist Dan Savage, has created a YouTube channel to encourage young victims of prejudice to manifest.

The "It Gets Better", focuses published testimonies by other users.

According to Savage, the idea for creating the channel came after the suicide of young Billy Lucas, a victim of bullying committed by his classmates.

In all, 24 interviews are now available in the channel, including some celebrities, like the blogger Perez Hilton. Besides the canal, Savage keeps a blog and a podcast where he comments on news related to the cause gay.

Activist creates YouTube channel for the gay cause

The issue of gay activist Dan Savage, has created a YouTube channel to encourage young victims of prejudice to manifest.

The "It Gets Better", focuses published testimonies by other users.

According to Savage, the idea for creating the channel came after the suicide of young Billy Lucas, a victim of bullying committed by his classmates.

In all, 24 interviews are now available in the channel, including some celebrities, like the blogger Perez Hilton. Besides the canal, Savage keeps a blog and a podcast where he comments on news related to the cause gay.

Fede Gonzalez: From Size To Definition

Strong and aspiring: Fede Gonzalez is a 20-year-old natural bodybuilder from Buenos Aires, Argentina. In his Modelmayhem.com profile he writes: "I dedicate my whole time to improve my physique. I want to get bigger and take part in international bodybuilding competitions. And I would like to work as a fitness model."

Fede Gonzalez: From Size To Definition

Strong and aspiring: Fede Gonzalez is a 20-year-old natural bodybuilder from Buenos Aires, Argentina. In his Modelmayhem.com profile he writes: "I dedicate my whole time to improve my physique. I want to get bigger and take part in international bodybuilding competitions. And I would like to work as a fitness model."

Zac Compton: Intensive Dips

He knows how to get big triceps and massive arms. In this video 20-year-old bodybuilder Zac Compton takes 190 pounds plus his bodyweight for some repetitions on dips.

With Ed Miliband as Labour leader, two major parties are led by gay marriage advocates

Members of the the Labour party and affiliated trade unions together with MPs and MEPs have elected Ed Miliband as their new leader. Mr Miliband topped a poll for PinkNews.co.uk of Labour party and affiliated union members earlier this month.

The result means that both the Liberal Democrats and the Labour party have leaders who are in favour of full LGBT marriage equality. Both the Liberal Democrats and the Green party have marriage equality as official party policy.

Ed Miliband beat his brother by 50.65 per cent to 49.35 per cent after the votes in favour of Ed Balls, Diane Abbott and Andy Burnham were redistributed. In the first round, Diane Abbott scored 7.42 per cent, Ed Balls 11.79 per cent, Andy Burnham 8.68 per cent, David Miliband 37.78 per cent and Ed Miliband with 34.33 per cent.

Earlier this month, PinkNews.co.uk published a then surprising poll result, showing that Ed Miliband was the overwhelming choice of LGBT members of the Labour party (or affiliated union) for leader of the party with 42 per cent support. Despite the support from four leading lesbian and gay MPs in an open letter to PinkNews.co.uk during the polling period, David Miliband secured the support of just 31 per cent of LGBT party members. Diane Abbott was ranked third with the support of 16 per cent, Andy Burnham seven per cent and Ed Balls last with four per cent.

Gay rights record
Ed Miliband was only elected to the House of Commons in 2005, after the equalisation of the age of consent, the abolition of Section 28 and the Civil Partnerhips Act. But he was able to vote in favour of the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation Regulations) in 2007 and against two amendment to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill which sought to limit the rights of lesbians to access IVF treatment.

Pledges to the LGBT community
Writing for PinkNews.co.uk last month, Mr Miliband argued that civil partnerships were "not good enough". He added: "I know that civil partnerships were a major step forward, but I also hear those who want the genuine equality of gay marriage."

"'Separate but equal' is not good enough and PinkNews.co.uk’s own recent poll demonstrated the huge support in the LGBT community for a right to marry. The cruel consequence of the current compromise is trans people forced to divorce their partners before they could be legally recognised in their new gender. I want to see heterosexual and same-sex partnerships put on an equal basis and a Labour Party that I lead will campaign to make gay marriage happen."

Mr Miliband also used the editorial to call for an end to the ban on gay men donating blood, an end to LGBT asylum seekers being sent back to countries that persecute LGBT people and for stronger laws against inciting homophobic hatred.

PinkNews.co.uk comment
After PinkNews.co.uk published a poll showing that Ed Miliband was the favourite among LGBT Labour party and affiliated union members, this publication published a leader "Is Ed Miliband the leader to advance LGBT equality in Britain?". In it, we argued "with the current balance of the House of Commons it will be possible for the Liberal Democrats, Labour party and liberal Conservatives to form a coalition to fight for LGBT rights. There are enough Conservative MPs that if given the opportunity to vote on the issue would support marriage equality and the end of the ban on gay men donating blood (the Government already supports changes to asylum policy). This fight should be led by which ever Miliband becomes leader so they can fix the messy situation left behind by the Government they were key members of and turn nice sounding platitudes into real action."

We call on Mr Miliband to continue to fight for the LGBT equality changes he pledged as Labour leader.

With Ed Miliband as Labour leader, two major parties are led by gay marriage advocates

Members of the the Labour party and affiliated trade unions together with MPs and MEPs have elected Ed Miliband as their new leader. Mr Miliband topped a poll for PinkNews.co.uk of Labour party and affiliated union members earlier this month.

The result means that both the Liberal Democrats and the Labour party have leaders who are in favour of full LGBT marriage equality. Both the Liberal Democrats and the Green party have marriage equality as official party policy.

Ed Miliband beat his brother by 50.65 per cent to 49.35 per cent after the votes in favour of Ed Balls, Diane Abbott and Andy Burnham were redistributed. In the first round, Diane Abbott scored 7.42 per cent, Ed Balls 11.79 per cent, Andy Burnham 8.68 per cent, David Miliband 37.78 per cent and Ed Miliband with 34.33 per cent.

Earlier this month, PinkNews.co.uk published a then surprising poll result, showing that Ed Miliband was the overwhelming choice of LGBT members of the Labour party (or affiliated union) for leader of the party with 42 per cent support. Despite the support from four leading lesbian and gay MPs in an open letter to PinkNews.co.uk during the polling period, David Miliband secured the support of just 31 per cent of LGBT party members. Diane Abbott was ranked third with the support of 16 per cent, Andy Burnham seven per cent and Ed Balls last with four per cent.

Gay rights record
Ed Miliband was only elected to the House of Commons in 2005, after the equalisation of the age of consent, the abolition of Section 28 and the Civil Partnerhips Act. But he was able to vote in favour of the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation Regulations) in 2007 and against two amendment to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill which sought to limit the rights of lesbians to access IVF treatment.

Pledges to the LGBT community
Writing for PinkNews.co.uk last month, Mr Miliband argued that civil partnerships were "not good enough". He added: "I know that civil partnerships were a major step forward, but I also hear those who want the genuine equality of gay marriage."

"'Separate but equal' is not good enough and PinkNews.co.uk’s own recent poll demonstrated the huge support in the LGBT community for a right to marry. The cruel consequence of the current compromise is trans people forced to divorce their partners before they could be legally recognised in their new gender. I want to see heterosexual and same-sex partnerships put on an equal basis and a Labour Party that I lead will campaign to make gay marriage happen."

Mr Miliband also used the editorial to call for an end to the ban on gay men donating blood, an end to LGBT asylum seekers being sent back to countries that persecute LGBT people and for stronger laws against inciting homophobic hatred.

PinkNews.co.uk comment
After PinkNews.co.uk published a poll showing that Ed Miliband was the favourite among LGBT Labour party and affiliated union members, this publication published a leader "Is Ed Miliband the leader to advance LGBT equality in Britain?". In it, we argued "with the current balance of the House of Commons it will be possible for the Liberal Democrats, Labour party and liberal Conservatives to form a coalition to fight for LGBT rights. There are enough Conservative MPs that if given the opportunity to vote on the issue would support marriage equality and the end of the ban on gay men donating blood (the Government already supports changes to asylum policy). This fight should be led by which ever Miliband becomes leader so they can fix the messy situation left behind by the Government they were key members of and turn nice sounding platitudes into real action."

We call on Mr Miliband to continue to fight for the LGBT equality changes he pledged as Labour leader.

Archbishop of Canterbury: Gay bishops are fine, so long as they are celibate

Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, in an interview published in The Times has revealed he has "no problem" with homosexuals becoming bishops, but only if they remain celibate. A leader column in the same newspaper criticises Dr Williams for his treatment of a homosexual twice rejected from becoming a bishop and calls on Dr Williams to affirm that discrimination against homosexuals is wrong.

In July of this year, for the second time, the dean of St Albans, the Rev Dr Jeffrey John, was rejected for a position as a bishop. Dr John entered into a civil partnership in 2006, but insists that his remains celibate. The Archbishop of Canterbury, reportedly decided decided that appointing Dr John as Bishop of Southwark would lead to a split in the church and that evangelical parishes would not recognise him as a bishop. Dr John was forced to abandon his appointment as Bishop of Reading in 2003 because of protests over his sexuality.

In the interview, published in today's Times, Dr Williams said: "To put it very simply, there’s no problem about a gay person who's a bishop. It’s about the fact that there are traditionally, historically, standards that the clergy are expected to observe. So there’s always a question about the personal life of the clergy." The standards that Dr Williams refers to include not engaging in sexual activity with someone of the same sex, informed by the teachings of the Bible. Although, since 1991, homosexuality has not been a bar to ordination in the Church of England.

Prior to his ascent to the top of the Church of England, Dr Williams was widely regarded as a liberal. Some have claimed that he turned his back on these liberal views as he has gripped the reins of power. He has been faced with the potential splintering of the Anglican Communion over homosexuality and the ordination of women bishops.

The Times challenged Dr Williams with a passage on the subject he wrote 21 year ago. "If we are looking for a sexual ethic that can be seriously informed by our Bible, there is a good deal to steer us away from assuming that reproductive sex is a norm."

Dr Williams responded by telling The Times: "That’s what I wrote as a theologian, putting forward a suggestion. That’s not the job I have now."

"I think if I were to say my job was not to be true to myself that might suggest that my job required me to be dishonest and if that were the case then I’d be really worried. I’m not elected on a manifesto to further this agenda or that. I have to be someone who holds the reins for the whole debate."

In June of this year, Dr Williams suspended members of the US Episcopalian Church from serving on any Anglican ecumenical bodies after it appointed the openly lesbian Mary Glasspool as assistant Los Angeles bishop.

Today, the human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell told The Times: "Before he became Archbishop of Canterbury, he [Dr Williams] supported gay inclusion and equality. Now he victimises gay clergy like Jeffrey John and goes out of his way to accommodate some of the most hateful Christian homophobes in the world. In his eyes, Church unity is more important than the human rights of lesbian and gay people. "

In a somewhat surprising leader column, The Times backs Mr Tatchell's argument. It argues that "secular culture acknowledges the injustice of discrimination against homosexuals. The treatment of Canon Jeffrey John, a chaste homosexual twice rejected as a bishop, offends against a widely held sense of natural justice. In electing homosexual bishops, Anglicanism might suffer defections; but it would affirm its soul.

"This is not a call to choose modern mores over biblical authority, for Anglicans have long understood that the interpretation of Scripture lies in the hands of the Church. The Apostle Peter enjoined: 'Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation.

"Interpretation belongs to the tradition of Christendom, in which Dr Williams takes an historic role. He should affirm as a Christian leader and a theologian that discrimination against homosexuals is wrong. In the Church, as in the nation, let justice be done — and the heavens will not fall."

Archbishop of Canterbury: Gay bishops are fine, so long as they are celibate

Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, in an interview published in The Times has revealed he has "no problem" with homosexuals becoming bishops, but only if they remain celibate. A leader column in the same newspaper criticises Dr Williams for his treatment of a homosexual twice rejected from becoming a bishop and calls on Dr Williams to affirm that discrimination against homosexuals is wrong.

In July of this year, for the second time, the dean of St Albans, the Rev Dr Jeffrey John, was rejected for a position as a bishop. Dr John entered into a civil partnership in 2006, but insists that his remains celibate. The Archbishop of Canterbury, reportedly decided decided that appointing Dr John as Bishop of Southwark would lead to a split in the church and that evangelical parishes would not recognise him as a bishop. Dr John was forced to abandon his appointment as Bishop of Reading in 2003 because of protests over his sexuality.

In the interview, published in today's Times, Dr Williams said: "To put it very simply, there’s no problem about a gay person who's a bishop. It’s about the fact that there are traditionally, historically, standards that the clergy are expected to observe. So there’s always a question about the personal life of the clergy." The standards that Dr Williams refers to include not engaging in sexual activity with someone of the same sex, informed by the teachings of the Bible. Although, since 1991, homosexuality has not been a bar to ordination in the Church of England.

Prior to his ascent to the top of the Church of England, Dr Williams was widely regarded as a liberal. Some have claimed that he turned his back on these liberal views as he has gripped the reins of power. He has been faced with the potential splintering of the Anglican Communion over homosexuality and the ordination of women bishops.

The Times challenged Dr Williams with a passage on the subject he wrote 21 year ago. "If we are looking for a sexual ethic that can be seriously informed by our Bible, there is a good deal to steer us away from assuming that reproductive sex is a norm."

Dr Williams responded by telling The Times: "That’s what I wrote as a theologian, putting forward a suggestion. That’s not the job I have now."

"I think if I were to say my job was not to be true to myself that might suggest that my job required me to be dishonest and if that were the case then I’d be really worried. I’m not elected on a manifesto to further this agenda or that. I have to be someone who holds the reins for the whole debate."

In June of this year, Dr Williams suspended members of the US Episcopalian Church from serving on any Anglican ecumenical bodies after it appointed the openly lesbian Mary Glasspool as assistant Los Angeles bishop.

Today, the human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell told The Times: "Before he became Archbishop of Canterbury, he [Dr Williams] supported gay inclusion and equality. Now he victimises gay clergy like Jeffrey John and goes out of his way to accommodate some of the most hateful Christian homophobes in the world. In his eyes, Church unity is more important than the human rights of lesbian and gay people. "

In a somewhat surprising leader column, The Times backs Mr Tatchell's argument. It argues that "secular culture acknowledges the injustice of discrimination against homosexuals. The treatment of Canon Jeffrey John, a chaste homosexual twice rejected as a bishop, offends against a widely held sense of natural justice. In electing homosexual bishops, Anglicanism might suffer defections; but it would affirm its soul.

"This is not a call to choose modern mores over biblical authority, for Anglicans have long understood that the interpretation of Scripture lies in the hands of the Church. The Apostle Peter enjoined: 'Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation.

"Interpretation belongs to the tradition of Christendom, in which Dr Williams takes an historic role. He should affirm as a Christian leader and a theologian that discrimination against homosexuals is wrong. In the Church, as in the nation, let justice be done — and the heavens will not fall."

Allowing straight people to have civil partnerships 'could cost £5 billion' £5 billion marriage equality figure was calculated by Stonewall

The origin of the £5 billion figure quoted by Stonewall as a possible cost of marriage equality has been revealed.

According to Brian Paddick, the former deputy assistant commissioner of the Met Police and former Lib Dem London mayoral candidate, the figure was calculated for Stonewall by a former civil servant.

The charity is thought to have carried out research into the possible arguments against opening up marriage and civil partnerships to all couples and the figure was cited by chief executive Ben Summerskill at a Liberal Democrat debate on marriage equality this week.

It is understood that the figure relates to a theoretical increase in straight couples taking up the opportunity of civil partnerships, with knock-on implications to their entitlement to pension and tax benefits.

Mr Summerskill was accused by some present at the meeting of arguing against the party's motion on supporting marriage equality at the Monday meeting. The motion was overwhelmingly passed the next day.

Mr Paddick, who was at the meeting, said the figure was calculated by Stonewall, rather than the government.

He told PinkNews.co.uk: "The Treasury did do an impact assessment for the final reading of the Civil Partnerships Bill.

"And someone who was in the government, actually, who now works for Stonewall, took that assessment and extrapolated it to come up with the £5 billion figure, based on an estimated half a million straight people wanting to enter into civil partnerships if that option was available to them."

Mr Paddick added that he had been told this by a source within Stonewall.

Mr Summerskill said this evening that the £5 billion figure had been extrapolated from the final regulatory assessment of the Civil Partnership Bill and had been calculated by a former civil servant for Stonewall, as the original assessment made no mention of civil partnerships for heterosexuals.

He added that it was "ludicrous" to ask at 7pm on a Friday evening whether that figure was based on an estimate of half a million straight people entering into civil partnerships if they were allowed to.

"Our clear argument is that if people are told that the government will introduce [an equality measure] that may cost £5 billion over ten years, they may be skeptical," he said.

"Supporting straight people is not one of our objectives. They can look after themselves. It is an issue of strategy and tactics."

This evening, Stonewall announced that it was "consulting widely" on the future of civil partnerships and said it hoped its final position had the support of the wider gay, lesbian and bisexual public.

The charity, which used PinkPaper.com to publish its statement, said: “We’re consulting as widely as possible on the future of civil partnership and gay marriage.

“There are a number of different options which all have vocal supporters and detractors. That’s why we’re determined to try and build a broad consensus in the LGB community so we can be sure that our final position has the backing of Stonewall supporters and the wider lesbian, gay and bisexual public.

“We’re also determined that this issue shouldn’t be used as a party political football.”

Allowing straight people to have civil partnerships 'could cost £5 billion' £5 billion marriage equality figure was calculated by Stonewall

The origin of the £5 billion figure quoted by Stonewall as a possible cost of marriage equality has been revealed.

According to Brian Paddick, the former deputy assistant commissioner of the Met Police and former Lib Dem London mayoral candidate, the figure was calculated for Stonewall by a former civil servant.

The charity is thought to have carried out research into the possible arguments against opening up marriage and civil partnerships to all couples and the figure was cited by chief executive Ben Summerskill at a Liberal Democrat debate on marriage equality this week.

It is understood that the figure relates to a theoretical increase in straight couples taking up the opportunity of civil partnerships, with knock-on implications to their entitlement to pension and tax benefits.

Mr Summerskill was accused by some present at the meeting of arguing against the party's motion on supporting marriage equality at the Monday meeting. The motion was overwhelmingly passed the next day.

Mr Paddick, who was at the meeting, said the figure was calculated by Stonewall, rather than the government.

He told PinkNews.co.uk: "The Treasury did do an impact assessment for the final reading of the Civil Partnerships Bill.

"And someone who was in the government, actually, who now works for Stonewall, took that assessment and extrapolated it to come up with the £5 billion figure, based on an estimated half a million straight people wanting to enter into civil partnerships if that option was available to them."

Mr Paddick added that he had been told this by a source within Stonewall.

Mr Summerskill said this evening that the £5 billion figure had been extrapolated from the final regulatory assessment of the Civil Partnership Bill and had been calculated by a former civil servant for Stonewall, as the original assessment made no mention of civil partnerships for heterosexuals.

He added that it was "ludicrous" to ask at 7pm on a Friday evening whether that figure was based on an estimate of half a million straight people entering into civil partnerships if they were allowed to.

"Our clear argument is that if people are told that the government will introduce [an equality measure] that may cost £5 billion over ten years, they may be skeptical," he said.

"Supporting straight people is not one of our objectives. They can look after themselves. It is an issue of strategy and tactics."

This evening, Stonewall announced that it was "consulting widely" on the future of civil partnerships and said it hoped its final position had the support of the wider gay, lesbian and bisexual public.

The charity, which used PinkPaper.com to publish its statement, said: “We’re consulting as widely as possible on the future of civil partnership and gay marriage.

“There are a number of different options which all have vocal supporters and detractors. That’s why we’re determined to try and build a broad consensus in the LGB community so we can be sure that our final position has the backing of Stonewall supporters and the wider lesbian, gay and bisexual public.

“We’re also determined that this issue shouldn’t be used as a party political football.”

Brian Paddick won't run for London mayor

Former London mayoral hopeful Brian Paddick has said he won't run for London mayor in 2012.

The former most senior out gay police officer in Britain was the Liberal Democrat candidate in the 2008 race but came third with ten per cent of the vote behind winner Boris Johnson and Ken Livingstone.

Instead, he told PinkNews.co.uk, he is supporting 32-year-old Duwayne Brooks, a Liberal Democrat councillor and friend of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence, for the Liberal Democrat nomination.

"We have an excellent potential candidate. . . [if he wins the nomination], I would be throwing my weight behind that candidate," he said.

When asked why he would not seek the nomination, Mr Paddick said: "Because I think Duwayne Brooks is a better candidate. And has a better chance of winning. I think Londoners deserve a clear choice of candidate, not a mirror-image re-run of what happened last time."

He added: "I told a BBC Politics Show that one character in a London race is enough choice for Londoners.

Last week, Mr Paddick said Mr Brooks would be a "serious alternative" for Lib Dem supporters eager to see anyone but former Lib Dem MP Lembit Opik step up to the role.

He also ruled out becoming an MP, saying the long hours would mean he would barely see his husband Petter, who lives and works in Oslo.

The former reality TV star, who retired in 2007, says he would consider taking up a seat in the House of Lords. He was the most popular choice among Lib Dem supporters for a peerage at last year's party conference and sees the opportunity as a "platform" for highlighting issues he's interested in.

Yesterday, Ken Livingstone won the Labour nomination for the party's contender. He beat Oona King with 68.8 per cent of the vote.

Incumbent Tory mayor Boris Johnson will stand for re-election.

Brian Paddick won't run for London mayor

Former London mayoral hopeful Brian Paddick has said he won't run for London mayor in 2012.

The former most senior out gay police officer in Britain was the Liberal Democrat candidate in the 2008 race but came third with ten per cent of the vote behind winner Boris Johnson and Ken Livingstone.

Instead, he told PinkNews.co.uk, he is supporting 32-year-old Duwayne Brooks, a Liberal Democrat councillor and friend of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence, for the Liberal Democrat nomination.

"We have an excellent potential candidate. . . [if he wins the nomination], I would be throwing my weight behind that candidate," he said.

When asked why he would not seek the nomination, Mr Paddick said: "Because I think Duwayne Brooks is a better candidate. And has a better chance of winning. I think Londoners deserve a clear choice of candidate, not a mirror-image re-run of what happened last time."

He added: "I told a BBC Politics Show that one character in a London race is enough choice for Londoners.

Last week, Mr Paddick said Mr Brooks would be a "serious alternative" for Lib Dem supporters eager to see anyone but former Lib Dem MP Lembit Opik step up to the role.

He also ruled out becoming an MP, saying the long hours would mean he would barely see his husband Petter, who lives and works in Oslo.

The former reality TV star, who retired in 2007, says he would consider taking up a seat in the House of Lords. He was the most popular choice among Lib Dem supporters for a peerage at last year's party conference and sees the opportunity as a "platform" for highlighting issues he's interested in.

Yesterday, Ken Livingstone won the Labour nomination for the party's contender. He beat Oona King with 68.8 per cent of the vote.

Incumbent Tory mayor Boris Johnson will stand for re-election.

Anti-gay megachurch preacher denies sex with young men

The pastor of one of America's largest congregations is denying that he coerced three young men into sex by offering them cars, jewellery and cash.

Eddie Long, the pastor of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Atlanta, has frequently attacked homosexuality and has called for a national ban on gay marriage.

This week, the married father of four was accused by three young men from his 25,000-strong congregation of abusing their trust and seducing them when they were aged 17 or 18.

The three men have waived anonymity and according to Associated Press, they are Maurice Robinson, 20, and Anthony Flagg, 21, and Jamal Parris, 23.

They have all filed lawsuits and claim he coerced them into sexual relationships by offering them cars, jewellery, holidays and cash.

Mr Long was due to appear on local radio station Kiss 104.1 FM this morning but said he had been advised by his lawyers not to.

Instead, his attorney Craig Gillen appeared on the show to refute the allegations.

Mr Gillen said: "These false allegations are an attack on Bishop Long personally. They are an attack on New Birth and all of the 25,000 good people who attend that church, and it's an attack on the mentoring program that has helped thousands of young men."

He added that Mr Long was "chomping at the bit" to speak out and would be addressing his congregation on Sunday.

Brenda Joy Bernstein, the lawyer for the three young men, accused the powerful church of covering up the claims.

She told Associated Press that her case will hinge on the men's testimony and plans to obtain records showing that the men travelled to places such as New York, Las Vegas and New Zealand with Mr Long.

Mr Long has been the pastor of New Birth Church since 1987. Civil rights leader Martin Luther King's daughter Bernice is also a pastor at the church and in 2004, she and Mr Long led a march to her father's grave to call for a ban on same-sex marriage.

Mr Long has received support from Ted Haggard, the disgraced former megachurch pastor who admitted sex and drug-taking with male prostitutes in 2006.

Mr Haggard said: "Long deserves a fair hearing and that if the accusations are false, he will survive the ordeal."

Anti-gay megachurch preacher denies sex with young men

The pastor of one of America's largest congregations is denying that he coerced three young men into sex by offering them cars, jewellery and cash.

Eddie Long, the pastor of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Atlanta, has frequently attacked homosexuality and has called for a national ban on gay marriage.

This week, the married father of four was accused by three young men from his 25,000-strong congregation of abusing their trust and seducing them when they were aged 17 or 18.

The three men have waived anonymity and according to Associated Press, they are Maurice Robinson, 20, and Anthony Flagg, 21, and Jamal Parris, 23.

They have all filed lawsuits and claim he coerced them into sexual relationships by offering them cars, jewellery, holidays and cash.

Mr Long was due to appear on local radio station Kiss 104.1 FM this morning but said he had been advised by his lawyers not to.

Instead, his attorney Craig Gillen appeared on the show to refute the allegations.

Mr Gillen said: "These false allegations are an attack on Bishop Long personally. They are an attack on New Birth and all of the 25,000 good people who attend that church, and it's an attack on the mentoring program that has helped thousands of young men."

He added that Mr Long was "chomping at the bit" to speak out and would be addressing his congregation on Sunday.

Brenda Joy Bernstein, the lawyer for the three young men, accused the powerful church of covering up the claims.

She told Associated Press that her case will hinge on the men's testimony and plans to obtain records showing that the men travelled to places such as New York, Las Vegas and New Zealand with Mr Long.

Mr Long has been the pastor of New Birth Church since 1987. Civil rights leader Martin Luther King's daughter Bernice is also a pastor at the church and in 2004, she and Mr Long led a march to her father's grave to call for a ban on same-sex marriage.

Mr Long has received support from Ted Haggard, the disgraced former megachurch pastor who admitted sex and drug-taking with male prostitutes in 2006.

Mr Haggard said: "Long deserves a fair hearing and that if the accusations are false, he will survive the ordeal."

updated: Councillor accused of gay slur apologises

A Tory councillor accused of calling a gay city council leader a "faggot" has apologised.

Jim Farquharson denied calling Liberal Democrat city leader John Stewart the offensive term and said he had been misheard.

However, he admitted calling Mr Stewart a "fat git" and a "fascist".

The pair had a private meeting yesterday and Mr Farquharson said he believed the matter was closed.

He told the Press and Journal: “What was alleged was not true, I did not describe him in any homophobic terms at all.

“We shook hands and as far as I understand the matter is now closed. I have learned my lesson from this incident."

But Mr Stewart said of the apology: “You could break my nose and apologise and I would still have a broken nose.

“Just because someone apologises for something does not make it acceptable behaviour."

The row started on Monday after Mr Farquharson claimed Mr Stewart was showing preference to a rival Tory faction in the council.

A council official claimed to have overheard Mr Farquharson using the word "faggot" but the councillor claimed he was actually saying "fat git".

updated: Councillor accused of gay slur apologises

A Tory councillor accused of calling a gay city council leader a "faggot" has apologised.

Jim Farquharson denied calling Liberal Democrat city leader John Stewart the offensive term and said he had been misheard.

However, he admitted calling Mr Stewart a "fat git" and a "fascist".

The pair had a private meeting yesterday and Mr Farquharson said he believed the matter was closed.

He told the Press and Journal: “What was alleged was not true, I did not describe him in any homophobic terms at all.

“We shook hands and as far as I understand the matter is now closed. I have learned my lesson from this incident."

But Mr Stewart said of the apology: “You could break my nose and apologise and I would still have a broken nose.

“Just because someone apologises for something does not make it acceptable behaviour."

The row started on Monday after Mr Farquharson claimed Mr Stewart was showing preference to a rival Tory faction in the council.

A council official claimed to have overheard Mr Farquharson using the word "faggot" but the councillor claimed he was actually saying "fat git".

£5 billion marriage equality figure was calculated by Stonewall

The origin of the £5 billion figure quoted by Stonewall as a possible cost of marriage equality has been revealed.

According to Brian Paddick, the former deputy assistant commissioner of the Met Police and former Lib Dem London mayoral candidate, the figure was calculated for Stonewall by a former civil servant.

The charity is thought to have carried out research into the possible arguments against opening up marriage and civil partnerships to all couples and the figure was cited by chief executive Ben Summerskill at a Liberal Democrat debate on marriage equality this week.

It is understood that the figure relates to a theoretical increase in straight couples taking up the opportunity of civil partnerships, with knock-on implications to their entitlement to pension and tax benefits.

Mr Summerskill was accused by some present at the meeting of arguing against the party's motion on supporting marriage equality at the Monday meeting. The motion was overwhelmingly passed the next day.

Mr Paddick, who was at the meeting, said the figure was calculated by Stonewall, rather than the government.

He told PinkNews.co.uk: "The Treasury did do an impact assessment for the final reading of the Civil Partnerships Bill.

"And someone who was in the government, actually, who now works for Stonewall, took that assessment and extrapolated it to come up with the £5 billion figure, based on an estimated half a million straight people wanting to enter into civil partnerships if that option was available to them."

Mr Paddick added that he had been told this by a source within Stonewall.

Mr Summerskill said this evening that the £5 billion figure had been extrapolated from the final regulatory assessment of the Civil Partnership Bill and had been calculated by a former civil servant for Stonewall, as the original assessment made no mention of civil partnerships for heterosexuals.

He added that it was "ludicrous" to ask at 7pm on a Friday evening whether that figure was based on an estimate of half a million straight people.

"Our clear argument is that if people are told that the government will introduce [an equality measure] that may cost £5 billion over ten years, they may be skeptical," he said.

"Supporting straight people is not one of our objectives. They can look after themselves. It is an issue of strategy and tactics."

This evening, Stonewall announced that it was "consulting widely" on the future of civil partnerships and said it hoped its final position had the support of the wider gay, lesbian and bisexual public.

The charity, which used PinkPaper.com to publish its statement, said: “We’re consulting as widely as possible on the future of civil partnership and gay marriage.

“There are a number of different options which all have vocal supporters and detractors. That’s why we’re determined to try and build a broad consensus in the LGB community so we can be sure that our final position has the backing of Stonewall supporters and the wider lesbian, gay and bisexual public.

“We’re also determined that this issue shouldn’t be used as a party political football.”

£5 billion marriage equality figure was calculated by Stonewall

The origin of the £5 billion figure quoted by Stonewall as a possible cost of marriage equality has been revealed.

According to Brian Paddick, the former deputy assistant commissioner of the Met Police and former Lib Dem London mayoral candidate, the figure was calculated for Stonewall by a former civil servant.

The charity is thought to have carried out research into the possible arguments against opening up marriage and civil partnerships to all couples and the figure was cited by chief executive Ben Summerskill at a Liberal Democrat debate on marriage equality this week.

It is understood that the figure relates to a theoretical increase in straight couples taking up the opportunity of civil partnerships, with knock-on implications to their entitlement to pension and tax benefits.

Mr Summerskill was accused by some present at the meeting of arguing against the party's motion on supporting marriage equality at the Monday meeting. The motion was overwhelmingly passed the next day.

Mr Paddick, who was at the meeting, said the figure was calculated by Stonewall, rather than the government.

He told PinkNews.co.uk: "The Treasury did do an impact assessment for the final reading of the Civil Partnerships Bill.

"And someone who was in the government, actually, who now works for Stonewall, took that assessment and extrapolated it to come up with the £5 billion figure, based on an estimated half a million straight people wanting to enter into civil partnerships if that option was available to them."

Mr Paddick added that he had been told this by a source within Stonewall.

Mr Summerskill said this evening that the £5 billion figure had been extrapolated from the final regulatory assessment of the Civil Partnership Bill and had been calculated by a former civil servant for Stonewall, as the original assessment made no mention of civil partnerships for heterosexuals.

He added that it was "ludicrous" to ask at 7pm on a Friday evening whether that figure was based on an estimate of half a million straight people.

"Our clear argument is that if people are told that the government will introduce [an equality measure] that may cost £5 billion over ten years, they may be skeptical," he said.

"Supporting straight people is not one of our objectives. They can look after themselves. It is an issue of strategy and tactics."

This evening, Stonewall announced that it was "consulting widely" on the future of civil partnerships and said it hoped its final position had the support of the wider gay, lesbian and bisexual public.

The charity, which used PinkPaper.com to publish its statement, said: “We’re consulting as widely as possible on the future of civil partnership and gay marriage.

“There are a number of different options which all have vocal supporters and detractors. That’s why we’re determined to try and build a broad consensus in the LGB community so we can be sure that our final position has the backing of Stonewall supporters and the wider lesbian, gay and bisexual public.

“We’re also determined that this issue shouldn’t be used as a party political football.”

1.5% figure is wrong, says gay website with 2.2 million members

Gay networking websites Gaydar and GaydarGirls say that estimates of 1.5 per cent of the population being gay or bisexual cannot be true as they have 2.2 million members in the UK.

Yesterday, the Office of National Statistics published a survey of 450,000 people – the second largest after the census – which suggested that only one per cent of British people are gay or lesbian and 0.5 per cent are bisexual.

However, the websites say their membership figures account for 6.7 per cent of the population – just above the government estimate of six per cent.

Yesterday's figures suggested that there are approximately 480,000 gay men and lesbians and 245,000 bisexual people in Britain – 725,000 LGB people in total.

But the websites, which offer members the chance to meet for dating and sex, say 2,185,072 British men and women have registered with them.

Trevor Martin, managing director at Gaydar said; “The Office for National Statistics figures don’t add up. With 2.2 million Gaydar profiles in the UK either there are a lot of straight guys playing away from girlfriends or every single gay and lesbian in the country tunes into GaydarRadio – or the ONS have got it terribly wrong.”

The 1.5 per cent figure has already been used by some figures to question government efforts to tackle homophobia.

Mike Judge, of the Christian Institute, said: “A large amount of public money has been spent on the basis of higher figures, which have turned out to be a lie.”

Conservative MP Philip Davies added: “An awful lot of focus in diversity issues is given to people’s sexual preference and this difference is not as widespread as believed.”

Yesterday, gay lobby group Stonewall said the figures were likely to be an underestimation because many gay people may be unwilling to identify themselves as gay in a survey.

Spokeswoman Ruth Hunt said she would expect to see the figures rise as asking about sexual orientation becomes more commonplace.

In the national survey, 95 per cent of respondents said they were heterosexual.

Nearly four per cent of those asked refused to answer, said they did not know or described themselves as "other".

Of the five per cent who did not say they were heterosexual, one per cent said they were gay or lesbian, 0.5 per cent said they were bisexual and 3.5 per cent refused to answer the question, described themselves as "other" or said they did not know.

Stonewall and the government both use a figure of six per cent of the population being lesbian, gay or bisexual, which works out at 3.6 million people.

This figure comes from 2005 research by the Department for Trade and Industry.

Other studies on sexual orientation have found that the figure varies between six and ten per cent.

1.5% figure is wrong, says gay website with 2.2 million members

Gay networking websites Gaydar and GaydarGirls say that estimates of 1.5 per cent of the population being gay or bisexual cannot be true as they have 2.2 million members in the UK.

Yesterday, the Office of National Statistics published a survey of 450,000 people – the second largest after the census – which suggested that only one per cent of British people are gay or lesbian and 0.5 per cent are bisexual.

However, the websites say their membership figures account for 6.7 per cent of the population – just above the government estimate of six per cent.

Yesterday's figures suggested that there are approximately 480,000 gay men and lesbians and 245,000 bisexual people in Britain – 725,000 LGB people in total.

But the websites, which offer members the chance to meet for dating and sex, say 2,185,072 British men and women have registered with them.

Trevor Martin, managing director at Gaydar said; “The Office for National Statistics figures don’t add up. With 2.2 million Gaydar profiles in the UK either there are a lot of straight guys playing away from girlfriends or every single gay and lesbian in the country tunes into GaydarRadio – or the ONS have got it terribly wrong.”

The 1.5 per cent figure has already been used by some figures to question government efforts to tackle homophobia.

Mike Judge, of the Christian Institute, said: “A large amount of public money has been spent on the basis of higher figures, which have turned out to be a lie.”

Conservative MP Philip Davies added: “An awful lot of focus in diversity issues is given to people’s sexual preference and this difference is not as widespread as believed.”

Yesterday, gay lobby group Stonewall said the figures were likely to be an underestimation because many gay people may be unwilling to identify themselves as gay in a survey.

Spokeswoman Ruth Hunt said she would expect to see the figures rise as asking about sexual orientation becomes more commonplace.

In the national survey, 95 per cent of respondents said they were heterosexual.

Nearly four per cent of those asked refused to answer, said they did not know or described themselves as "other".

Of the five per cent who did not say they were heterosexual, one per cent said they were gay or lesbian, 0.5 per cent said they were bisexual and 3.5 per cent refused to answer the question, described themselves as "other" or said they did not know.

Stonewall and the government both use a figure of six per cent of the population being lesbian, gay or bisexual, which works out at 3.6 million people.

This figure comes from 2005 research by the Department for Trade and Industry.

Other studies on sexual orientation have found that the figure varies between six and ten per cent.

HIV quangos face the axe, while EHRC is 'at risk'

Two HIV quangos will reportedly be abolished as part of government plans to save money.

The Expert Advisory Group on HIV/AIDS and the Independent Advisory Group of Sexual Health and HIV are two of 177 taxpayer-funded bodies to be scrapped, a list leaked to the Daily Telegraph suggests.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission is one of 94 bodies said to be under review.

Both of the HIV bodies offer advice to the government from a number of medical experts, while the EHRC acts as a human rights watchdog.

In the last year, the EHRC has suffered the loss of four commissioners, some of whom criticised its leader Trevor Phillips.

Earlier this year, a Commons report said its inception had been "patently flawed" and cost taxpayers almost £39 million.

In May, prime minister David Cameron promised a "bonfire of the quangos" designed to save billions of pounds of public money. Thousands of jobs are expected to be lost.

A similar list of 180 quangos to be abolished was sent to the BBC and the Cabinet has ordered an inquiry into the leaks.

A government spokeswoman did not comment on the leak but said the government had "made it clear that it is committed to radically increasing accountability and improving efficiency".

She added: "The Cabinet Secretary has this morning asked for an immediate investigation into the leak of a government document on public bodies reform.

"We deeply regret any extra uncertainty for employees that this irresponsible leak has caused".

A senior Whitehall source told the Daily Telegraph: “These reforms represent the most significant rolling back of bureaucracy and the state for decades.

"Our starting point has been that every quango must not only justify its existence but its reliance on public money.”

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Department of Health are expected to suffer the most under Mr Cameron's "bonfire of the quangos".

Bodies said to be facing abolition are the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, the Health Protection Agency and the Commission for Rural Communities.

Ninety-four others are at risk of being scrapped, four will be privatised and 129 will be merged, the list suggests.

HIV quangos face the axe, while EHRC is 'at risk'

Two HIV quangos will reportedly be abolished as part of government plans to save money.

The Expert Advisory Group on HIV/AIDS and the Independent Advisory Group of Sexual Health and HIV are two of 177 taxpayer-funded bodies to be scrapped, a list leaked to the Daily Telegraph suggests.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission is one of 94 bodies said to be under review.

Both of the HIV bodies offer advice to the government from a number of medical experts, while the EHRC acts as a human rights watchdog.

In the last year, the EHRC has suffered the loss of four commissioners, some of whom criticised its leader Trevor Phillips.

Earlier this year, a Commons report said its inception had been "patently flawed" and cost taxpayers almost £39 million.

In May, prime minister David Cameron promised a "bonfire of the quangos" designed to save billions of pounds of public money. Thousands of jobs are expected to be lost.

A similar list of 180 quangos to be abolished was sent to the BBC and the Cabinet has ordered an inquiry into the leaks.

A government spokeswoman did not comment on the leak but said the government had "made it clear that it is committed to radically increasing accountability and improving efficiency".

She added: "The Cabinet Secretary has this morning asked for an immediate investigation into the leak of a government document on public bodies reform.

"We deeply regret any extra uncertainty for employees that this irresponsible leak has caused".

A senior Whitehall source told the Daily Telegraph: “These reforms represent the most significant rolling back of bureaucracy and the state for decades.

"Our starting point has been that every quango must not only justify its existence but its reliance on public money.”

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Department of Health are expected to suffer the most under Mr Cameron's "bonfire of the quangos".

Bodies said to be facing abolition are the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, the Health Protection Agency and the Commission for Rural Communities.

Ninety-four others are at risk of being scrapped, four will be privatised and 129 will be merged, the list suggests.

Ken Livingstone backed by Labour to become London mayor in 2012

Ken Livingstone has won the Labour nomination for London mayor in the 2012 election.

He defeated rival Oona King with 68.8 per cent of the vote.

Mr Livingstone was mayor of London between 2000 and 2008, before he was defeated by incumbent Tory mayor Boris Johnson.

The results of the vote were announced in London today and Mr Livingstone said he would "unite Londoners" against coalition public spending cuts.

He has also promised lower transport fares if he wins the race.

Last week, he announced a series of gay equality promises, including appointing a LGBT advisory board and reinstating the annual Pride reception.

He also promised to re-enter the Greater London Authority into Stonewall's annual diversity index.

The former MP, 65, has a good gay rights record, implementing the first civil partnerships register for gay couples in London in 2001.

However, he was criticised in 2005 for inviting to London and embracing the homophobic Islamist cleric Dr Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who has called for gays and lesbians to be killed.

Mr Johnson will stand for re-election in 2012 and former MP Lembit Opik hopes to win the Liberal Democrat nomination for the post.

Ken Livingstone backed by Labour to become London mayor in 2012

Ken Livingstone has won the Labour nomination for London mayor in the 2012 election.

He defeated rival Oona King with 68.8 per cent of the vote.

Mr Livingstone was mayor of London between 2000 and 2008, before he was defeated by incumbent Tory mayor Boris Johnson.

The results of the vote were announced in London today and Mr Livingstone said he would "unite Londoners" against coalition public spending cuts.

He has also promised lower transport fares if he wins the race.

Last week, he announced a series of gay equality promises, including appointing a LGBT advisory board and reinstating the annual Pride reception.

He also promised to re-enter the Greater London Authority into Stonewall's annual diversity index.

The former MP, 65, has a good gay rights record, implementing the first civil partnerships register for gay couples in London in 2001.

However, he was criticised in 2005 for inviting to London and embracing the homophobic Islamist cleric Dr Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who has called for gays and lesbians to be killed.

Mr Johnson will stand for re-election in 2012 and former MP Lembit Opik hopes to win the Liberal Democrat nomination for the post.

Gay men achieve world's longest kiss

Two American gay men have broken the world record for the longest kiss – locking lips for almost 33 hours.

Students Matty Daley and Bobby Canciello, who are just friends, hope to win a place in the Guiness Book of World Records for their achievement.

The pair, from the College of New Jersey, said they did the record-breaking stunt to raise awareness of the Trevor Project, a helpline which works to prevent suicide in LGBT young people.

They began their attempt on campus on 11:32 am on Saturday September 18th and finished at 8:02 pm the following day, with their actual time being 32 hours, 30 minutes, 45 seconds and 20 milliseconds.

Guinness World Records rules state that contenders for the longest kiss must not sit down, use the bathroom or wear adult diapers.

The bid has to take place in public and participants' lips must be touching at all times.

Daley and Canciello said they prepared for the kiss for months, exercising, practising standing for hours and devising a system of hand signals for when one needed to stretch or move.

The pair's kiss was streamed live on the internet and officials from Guinness World Records will now review the footage to confirm whether they have broken the record.

Speaking afterwards, Canciello said muscle strain was the hardest part, while Daley said he got lockjaw.

But they said the pain was "worth it" for highlighting gay visibility.

Caniciello told NJ.com that a teenager sent them a message saying "because of what you guys did, I'm feeling a lot more comfortable with my sexuality and I think I'm going to come out to my parents".

The student said: "All the pain was worth it. The second I read that message, I was just like, whatever, who cares about the pain, this is important."

The pair believe they have beaten the previous record by 23 minutes. This record was held by Nicola Matovik and Kristina Reinhart, a German couple.

Gay men achieve world's longest kiss

Two American gay men have broken the world record for the longest kiss – locking lips for almost 33 hours.

Students Matty Daley and Bobby Canciello, who are just friends, hope to win a place in the Guiness Book of World Records for their achievement.

The pair, from the College of New Jersey, said they did the record-breaking stunt to raise awareness of the Trevor Project, a helpline which works to prevent suicide in LGBT young people.

They began their attempt on campus on 11:32 am on Saturday September 18th and finished at 8:02 pm the following day, with their actual time being 32 hours, 30 minutes, 45 seconds and 20 milliseconds.

Guinness World Records rules state that contenders for the longest kiss must not sit down, use the bathroom or wear adult diapers.

The bid has to take place in public and participants' lips must be touching at all times.

Daley and Canciello said they prepared for the kiss for months, exercising, practising standing for hours and devising a system of hand signals for when one needed to stretch or move.

The pair's kiss was streamed live on the internet and officials from Guinness World Records will now review the footage to confirm whether they have broken the record.

Speaking afterwards, Canciello said muscle strain was the hardest part, while Daley said he got lockjaw.

But they said the pain was "worth it" for highlighting gay visibility.

Caniciello told NJ.com that a teenager sent them a message saying "because of what you guys did, I'm feeling a lot more comfortable with my sexuality and I think I'm going to come out to my parents".

The student said: "All the pain was worth it. The second I read that message, I was just like, whatever, who cares about the pain, this is important."

The pair believe they have beaten the previous record by 23 minutes. This record was held by Nicola Matovik and Kristina Reinhart, a German couple.

Teenager jailed for extorting £87,000 in gay chatline sting

An Edinburgh teenager has been jailed for 45 months after he was found guilty of extorting £87,700 in a sting on men using gay and adult chatlines.

Kelz Sutherland, 19, last month admitted nine charges of extortion between January 1st 2008 and December 31st 2009.

Edinburgh sheriff court heard that he had been part of a gang who targeted chatline users, tricking them into talking about underage sex and then threatening to expose them to police, friends and family.

The sting involved talking to men on gay and adult chatlines and steering the conservation to underage sex.

Sutherland would then put on a different voice and pretend to be a chatline monitor, saying that recordings of the conversations would be passed to police.

The men were told that the recordings could be deleted if they paid substantial sums of money.

The scam was discovered after one man went to police after being told to pay £8,000.

When police raided Sutherland's home in Bath Street, Edinburgh, after a surveillance operation, they found details of the men's phone numbers, addresses and workplaces on his computer, along with details of a number of bank accounts.

Sutherland was sentenced yesterday and Sheriff Deirdre Macneill QC told him his behaviour had been "despicable".

Teenager jailed for extorting £87,000 in gay chatline sting

An Edinburgh teenager has been jailed for 45 months after he was found guilty of extorting £87,700 in a sting on men using gay and adult chatlines.

Kelz Sutherland, 19, last month admitted nine charges of extortion between January 1st 2008 and December 31st 2009.

Edinburgh sheriff court heard that he had been part of a gang who targeted chatline users, tricking them into talking about underage sex and then threatening to expose them to police, friends and family.

The sting involved talking to men on gay and adult chatlines and steering the conservation to underage sex.

Sutherland would then put on a different voice and pretend to be a chatline monitor, saying that recordings of the conversations would be passed to police.

The men were told that the recordings could be deleted if they paid substantial sums of money.

The scam was discovered after one man went to police after being told to pay £8,000.

When police raided Sutherland's home in Bath Street, Edinburgh, after a surveillance operation, they found details of the men's phone numbers, addresses and workplaces on his computer, along with details of a number of bank accounts.

Sutherland was sentenced yesterday and Sheriff Deirdre Macneill QC told him his behaviour had been "despicable".

Peter Tatchell: Tide is turning on gay marriage

Same-sex marriage is an idea whose time has come. It is the growing trend all over the world, from Canada to South Africa and Argentina.

Why can't we have marriage equality in Britain too?

Political support for ending the ban on gay marriage is growing rapidly. London mayor Boris Johnson and Conservative MP and former party vice-chair Margot James have both come out in favour of allowing lesbian and gay couples to marry in a registry office, on the same terms as heterosexual partners.

This view is also endorsed by the leader and the deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats, Nick Clegg and Simon Hughes. Indeed, Hughes has predicted that the ban on same-sex marriage will go within five years.

All five Labour leadership contenders – Ed Balls, Diane Abbott, Andy Burnham, Ed Miliband and David Miliband – now back marriage equality, regardless of sexual orientation.

Public attitudes have also shifted strongly in favour of allowing gay couples to marry. A Populus poll for the Times newspaper in June 2009 found that 61 per cent of the public believe that: "Gay couples should have an equal right to get married, not just to have civil partnerships." Only 33 per cent disagreed.

Some people say that civil partnerships are sufficient for gay couples. This is hypocritical. They would not accept a similar ban on black people getting married.

They would never agree with a law that required black couples to register their relationships through a separate system called civil partnerships.

It would be racist to have separate laws for black and white couples. We'd call it apartheid, like what used to exist in South Africa. Well, black people are not banned from marriage but lesbian and gay couples are.

We are fobbed off with second class civil partnerships.

Personally, I don't like marriage. I share the feminist critique of its history of sexism and patriarchy. I would not want to get married. But as a democrat and human rights defender, I support the right of others to marry, if they wish.

That's why I believe that civil marriage in a registry office should be open to everyone without discrimination.

Don't get me wrong, civil partnerships are an important advance. They remedy many – though not all – of the injustices that used to be experienced by lesbian and gay couples. But they are not equality.

They are discrimination. Separate is not equal.

In terms of the law, civil partnerships are a form of sexual apartheid. They create a two-tier system of partnership recognition: one law for heterosexuals (civil marriage) and another law for same-sex couples (civil partnerships).

This perpetuates and extends discrimination. The homophobia of the ban on same-sex civil marriage is now compounded by the heterophobia of the ban on opposite-sex civil partnerships.

Just as a gay couple cannot have a civil marriage, a straight couple cannot have a civil partnership. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Sadly, the official policies of the Conservative and Labour parties do not support same-sex civil marriage. They oppose it. They support discrimination.

The Green Party and the Liberal Democrats are, so far, the only parties officially committed to giving same-sex partners the right to civil marriage – and heterosexual couples the right to civil partnerships.

In a democracy, we are all supposed to be equal under the law. The Con-Lib coalition's professed commitment to gay equality cannot be taken seriously while it upholds the ban on same-sex marriage. Over to you, Dave and Nick.

Peter Tatchell: Tide is turning on gay marriage

Same-sex marriage is an idea whose time has come. It is the growing trend all over the world, from Canada to South Africa and Argentina.

Why can't we have marriage equality in Britain too?

Political support for ending the ban on gay marriage is growing rapidly. London mayor Boris Johnson and Conservative MP and former party vice-chair Margot James have both come out in favour of allowing lesbian and gay couples to marry in a registry office, on the same terms as heterosexual partners.

This view is also endorsed by the leader and the deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats, Nick Clegg and Simon Hughes. Indeed, Hughes has predicted that the ban on same-sex marriage will go within five years.

All five Labour leadership contenders – Ed Balls, Diane Abbott, Andy Burnham, Ed Miliband and David Miliband – now back marriage equality, regardless of sexual orientation.

Public attitudes have also shifted strongly in favour of allowing gay couples to marry. A Populus poll for the Times newspaper in June 2009 found that 61 per cent of the public believe that: "Gay couples should have an equal right to get married, not just to have civil partnerships." Only 33 per cent disagreed.

Some people say that civil partnerships are sufficient for gay couples. This is hypocritical. They would not accept a similar ban on black people getting married.

They would never agree with a law that required black couples to register their relationships through a separate system called civil partnerships.

It would be racist to have separate laws for black and white couples. We'd call it apartheid, like what used to exist in South Africa. Well, black people are not banned from marriage but lesbian and gay couples are.

We are fobbed off with second class civil partnerships.

Personally, I don't like marriage. I share the feminist critique of its history of sexism and patriarchy. I would not want to get married. But as a democrat and human rights defender, I support the right of others to marry, if they wish.

That's why I believe that civil marriage in a registry office should be open to everyone without discrimination.

Don't get me wrong, civil partnerships are an important advance. They remedy many – though not all – of the injustices that used to be experienced by lesbian and gay couples. But they are not equality.

They are discrimination. Separate is not equal.

In terms of the law, civil partnerships are a form of sexual apartheid. They create a two-tier system of partnership recognition: one law for heterosexuals (civil marriage) and another law for same-sex couples (civil partnerships).

This perpetuates and extends discrimination. The homophobia of the ban on same-sex civil marriage is now compounded by the heterophobia of the ban on opposite-sex civil partnerships.

Just as a gay couple cannot have a civil marriage, a straight couple cannot have a civil partnership. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Sadly, the official policies of the Conservative and Labour parties do not support same-sex civil marriage. They oppose it. They support discrimination.

The Green Party and the Liberal Democrats are, so far, the only parties officially committed to giving same-sex partners the right to civil marriage – and heterosexual couples the right to civil partnerships.

In a democracy, we are all supposed to be equal under the law. The Con-Lib coalition's professed commitment to gay equality cannot be taken seriously while it upholds the ban on same-sex marriage. Over to you, Dave and Nick.