Unmarried politician shock horror

Congratulations to the Mail on Sunday, which fought off tough competition from its rivals to produce the most ridiculous story concerning the election of Ed Miliband as leader of the Labour Party.

"Ed Miliband becomes first British political leader of a major party to be living with his family out of wedlock", declared the paper, before rather unsubtly suggesting that this frightfully scandalous fact means the new leader of the opposition would launch an assault on the cherished institution of marriage were he ever to become Prime Minister:

"As the son of a North London Marxist intellectual, you might expect Ed Miliband to have a less than conventional approach to traditional family values.

And the birth certificate of his 15-month-old son, Daniel, would appear to bear this out, as it includes everything except any mention of the boy’s proud father."

Of course, after appearing to raise questions about a child's parentage, the Mail goes on to clarify that it is doing no such thing by adding that "there is no suggestion that Ed Miliband is not Daniel’s father" (although they seem to have been concerned enough to ring the Labour Party for clarification).

No, the Mail is definitely not trying to smear the new Labour leader by asking inappropriate and unnecessary questions about his relationship to his own son. Which is probably why today's edition asks "So will Ed Miliband now marry the mother of his son? (And why isn't he on the birth certificate)".

No need to worry though – given that the 19th century happened years ago, not even Daily Mail readers are going to be fainting at the sheer scandal of it all, or erupting with outrage at this latest piece of evidence that Britain is indeed going t'dogs. The readers comments will prove that, won't they? Here's John from Sheffield:

"Marxism doesn't advocate marriage. Electing this unmarried father of illegitimate children as Prime Minister would be one more gigantic step for this country towards it's [sic] moral decline."

Oh...

New Humanist (Rationalist Association) - discussing humanism, rationalism, atheism and free thought

Oh, I don't think that's the most ridiculous piece. Surely that title must go to Christina "Glenda" Odone in the Telegraph:

Quote:

Why hasn’t Ed Miliband married Justine Thornton? “The Copenhagen environmental summit got in the way. Then there was the general election, and now the leadership election.” These aren’t just evasive answers, they’re weird. Ed Miliband strikes me as one of those Labour types who are worried that the institution of marriage is “judgmental” of cohabiting couples. (Never mind the fact that Labour judges people the moment they reveal something as damning as a private education or belief in God.) And forgive the jargon, but are we also talking about that syndrome so common among men these days, commitment phobia? Ed Miliband likes to talk about the “closeness” of his family ties, but his behaviour towards his brother suggests the opposite: that this is a man who has problems with relationships. In this, as in other respects, he reminds me of his mentor, Gordon Brown – who, you may recall, had to be pushed towards the altar by his advisers. Already, I suspect, Ed and Justine are being pushed – towards a wedding at just the right point in the electoral cycle.

Ed Miliband hasn't married his pregnant partner. Does he have commitment phobia? – Telegraph Blogs

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.