Home Videos Photos

Jeremy Irons Clarifies His 'Anti-Gay' Remarks! Claims The Internet Is Judgmental!

| Filed under: Gay Gay GayPolitik

jeremy irons anti gay open letter

Jeremy Irons has been in a questionable position since he voiced his concerns on the legalization of same-sex marriage on HuffPost Live.

But the actor, whose father-marrying-son soundbite — WTF, right?? — has now been heard round the world, took to his official website to post an open letter regarding his prior comments. And, as it happens, it turns out Jeremy is far from anti-gay.

Ch-ch-check out his letter (below):

"I am deeply concerned that from my online discussion with the Huffington Post, it has been understood that I hold a position that is anti gay. This is as far from the truth of me as to say that I believe the earth is flat.

I was taking part in a short discussion around the practical meaning of Marriage, and how that institution might be altered by it becoming available to same-sex partners. Perhaps rather too flippantly I flew the kite of an example of the legal quagmire that might occur if same sex marriage entered the statute books, by raising the possibility of future marriage between same sex family members for tax reasons, (incest being illegal primarily in order to prevent inbreeding, and therefore an irrelevance in non reproductive relationships). Clearly this was a mischievous argument, but nonetheless valid.

I am clearly aware that many gay relationships are more long term, responsible and even healthier in their role of raising children, than their hetero equivalents, and that love often creates the desire to mark itself in a formal way, as Marriage would do. Clearly society should find a way of doing this. I had hoped that even on such a subject as this, where passions run high, the internet was a forum where ideas could be freely discussed without descending into name-calling.

I believe that is what it could be, but it depends on all of us behaving, even behind our aliases, in a humane, intelligent and open way."

We're glad Jeremy took the time to explain, and even happier that he isn't anti-gay. But seriouuusslyyyy, this is still some carazay shizz!

What do U all think??

[Image via WENN.]

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Celebrities Who've Been Accused Of Racism!
White House Correspondents' Dinner 2014: Worst Dressed!
White House Correspondents' Dinner: Twitpics & Instagram!
White House Correspondents Dinner 2014: Last Year's Fashion!
"Tom Cruise Role" Or "Gay Porn Star"??
19 Best Guy-On-Guy Movie Kisses EVER!
Email this  »

17 comments to “Jeremy Irons Clarifies His 'Anti-Gay' Remarks! Claims The Internet Is Judgmental!”

  1. Be-Atch says – reply to this


    1

    O.K……With THAT scarf, and THAT hair-cut, and THOSE glasses, HE ain't GAY ? ? ? ?

  2. lala says – reply to this


    2

    Agree with him, the internet is rather crazy and takes things the wrong way far too often.

  3. kiki says – reply to this


    3

    it is ok to have an opinion whether it's anti or pro gay no one should be bashed for speaking their mind #freedomofspeach

  4. thebigboot says – reply to this


    4

    I think it's funny you call someone a f*g yet will jump down someones throat for disagreeing with your thoughts.



  5. 5

    There is nothing wrong with being anti-gay; there is nothing wrong with expressing that belief. You may not agree with it, you filthy hypocritical homo, but that's just too bad. There WILL be a backlash against you homos being bullies, and I hope you get the worst of it. You're teaching that kid you bought your own brand of intolerance, and he'll grow up to know it and hate you for it. You're incapable of respecting an opinion that doesn't agree with your own and we all know it.



  6. 6

    He's just too damn intelligent and thoughtful for simplistic braindead morons like Perez. All they wanna hera is "we love the gays!!!" and theyre happy. God forbid you actually try and make any kind of profound or intellectual point. The dumb and uneducated just will not get it. Jeremy is facing the wrath of the silly dumb queens who can bearly even read.

  7. @v@ says – reply to this


    7

    I thought it was pretty clear that he was addressing possible future tax loophole marital scenarios in the first place. Media likes to make hay. His mind saw it clearly but he failed to fill in the blanks for the literal readers who sit all over the curve.



  8. 8

    Re: Be-Atch – YOU are a great example of why gays have a rep for being dumb shallow and stupid. You think sexuality is about what you wear? I swear you are your own worst enemies with such simplsitic bullshit. Jeremy was playing gay roles decades ago and works in an extremely liberal industry. He has no reason whatsoever to be in the closet. You need to quit with dumb stereotypes.



  9. 9

    Re: Pansy Hunter – There is EVERYTHING wrong with being anti-gay when you trample upon my civil rights. I am tired of my tax dollars supporting the families of bigots like you and not my own.

    As for the pity party, get a grip. If someone wants to spout homophobic hate in the name of freedom of speech, go right ahead. However, freedom of speech also allows us to give that hate speech repercussions.

    Where is my freedom of religion? And where is my freedom from your religion?

    You don't like it? Too bad for you.



  10. 10

    I can honestly say this argument is probably the most intelligent, logical argument I've heard against gay marriage. I mean, I'm all for gay marriage but what he pointed out is something that should be considered when discussing all of this. It makes a lot more sense as an argument against than anything about beastiality or pedophiles. I see where he's coming from and yeah, totally reasonable to say it and not be anti-gay.

  11. KH says – reply to this


    11

    Re: leliorisen – . I couldn't agree more with you. I hear so many people, closed and opened minded make rants about how being gay is agaisnt their religion and all that nonsense. Yet if someone tries to go against thoes views they claim freedom of speech and freedom of religion. However I don't recall the first admendment stating that everyone needs to be Christians and believe in God as so many of my reliatives seem to think. I admire this guy though just for the simple fact that he has come up with an argument that makes some what since and most importantly has nothing to do with religion, since religion and politics were seperated in the Constitution for a reason.

  12. caravaggio for irons says – reply to this


    12

    Love his comments on 'the nanny state'. This is CLEARLY a guy who we will hear a lot more of regarding the globalist take over and push for a ridiculous 'world government (run by European elite) as we are watching it try to unfold.

  13. Carter says – reply to this


    13

    Irons may say 'oh I've got no problem with gay people' now but the fact is that his original comments do reflect, essentially, homophobia. Believing that gay unions will debase marriage, which he does, is just transparently homophobic, even if you say it nicely.

  14. magnus says – reply to this


    14

    Even though I completely believe Irons is not in the slightest homophobic, I don't understand his argument. There are enough straight people already that take advantage in one way or another (tax reduction and more benefits for married people) of the institution of marriage so that hardly seems an argument for the concern Irons is voicing. If he's saying only straight people get the chance to take advantage, than he ís being discriminative. Probably not intentional, but still.



  15. 15

    Do we live in a society where people are only allowed an opinion as long as it agrees with our own? Even if he didn't support same sex marriage, so what? If a person is gay and "proud", why would he or she need the world to say "its okay, we support you"? If you stand for something, do it with conviction, and make peace with the fact that not everyone will agree with whatever choices you make or what you believe in. Its life, put your big girl panties on and deal with it.

  16. roma waldorf says – reply to this


    16

    Re: pdrocksmysocks – I thought of another issue that so far no one (that I'm aware of) brought up - is same sex marriage just for gays? I mean a gay person (of either sex) can be in a straight marriage, and not just to hide their real sexuality. After all, except for green card marriages, the government doesn't check if the marriage is consumed. Will it be required for two people for the same sex to be gay in order to be allowed to have a same sex marriage? There are straight couples that have no sex, or asexual couples who get married, maybe for love (without physical, sexual attraction) maybe for money, benefits etc. What if a straight man wants to marry his straight friend. who has a good job with a good insurance, so he could get that insurance? Or he has no family, no one to leave the money to, so he marries his best friend in order to leave him the money tax free since he intended to leave that money to his friend anyway. If there is a law that guarantees some benefits it's bound to be taken advantage of, abused, or used for the reasons it wasn't meant.

  17. roma waldorf says – reply to this


    17

    Re: magnus – In other words, unless you are 100% pro gay, pro gay marriage or any other gay issue you are a homophobe, even if you have rational, non religious reservations to some aspects of gay lifestyle or demands? What if gays demand that the taxpayer pay for surrogate mothers and I oppose it? It surely makes me a homophobe despite the fact that I am against discrimination, bulling civil unions (oh wait, that's so 10 years ago, nowadays if you only support civil unions you are a homophobe. It's become the new race card.