As it should be – ‘Call me Dave’ does not deserve congratulations for confirming the obvious.
However this is in direct conflict with Iain Duncan Smith. Iain Duncan Smith is going to be responsible for mending ‘broken Britain’. He will be in charge of families. IDS is a leading member of the Centre for Social Research – a Tory think tank that is already campaigning for the reduction of parental rights for non-biological gay parents.
Is Iain Duncan Smith going to be in charge of families? If so then how does ‘Call me Dave’ reconcile his alleged support for gay families with IDS’s attempts to reduce the rights of gay families?
Answers on a postcard to…
Some otherunanswered questions for ‘Call me Dave’ as well:
1. Why does he not support marriage equality for same sex couples?
2. Why does he support the religious exemption from the equality laws?
3. Considering how secular British society has become, why is he planning to massively increase funding to religious schools which he thinks should be exempt from equality laws?
4. Why does he refuse to acknowledge the vicious homophobia of his Polish allies in Europe. Pretending it doesn’t exist is not going to make it go away.
Could it be possible that ‘Call me Dave’ is lying.
I mean he used to work in PR – an industry known for its honesty and truthfulness…
“Dave”, ditch the far right Homoeurophobes if you want to be a credible potential PM and if you really want to convince us, don’t forget to send your Mrs out to play with the Gays; Works for Mrs Brown(!)…………:-)
BTW means nothing to me as I don’t want kiddies!
Well, lets not forget really who the Tories have most love for – the obscenely rich – see
Before the ridiculous orgy of Tory bashing gets into full swing let’s take a look at what the alternative has done for us:
Given that we have a straight choice (pun intended) between Dave and the Bully, can anyone really be contemplating 5 more years of new Labour horror?
SimonM – I’m sorry fella but it’s not 2001 when IDS was leader. It’s 2010 with Dude Dave as leader.
Too many people harkin on about the past. Wake up, it’s time to see the present and the future.
I am quite willing to give the Tories a go. We aren’t in the 1980′s any more. Those days have past. Labour change to become more Tory so if we can accept that then I can this.
So my vote will actually be Nothing to do with politics but the overwhelming desire to see the back of Labour and their stinking ways.
Cameron’s problem is that he MAY suddenly have become socially progressive but the grassroot in his party haven’t and he has to juggle between the two lest he finds himself with a bunch of MPs he can’t control… And my fear is that sooner or later the less progressive elements of the party will come back to the fore again if the Tories get elected.
Zefrog is right and the egregious Vulgar Regina wrong, as usual.
SimonM, I agree and he won’t back full marriage equality after he’s elected. Like Labour, he and his party are afraid of the state cult and the bigots in the House of Lords. The fact that gay couples are to be included in equal parental leaves emphasises the stigma that comes with civil partnerships. We are viewed differently and singled out as “that other” group with similar rights. In other words, our legal unions are less than “theirs”. He’s just another coward like Blair and Brown, the entire party in fact. I bet if he were forced to accept a civil partnership for himself, he’d be singing a different tune, that goes for most straights. Both orientations should have access to both by choice, but you can bet that most straights would not opt for a civil partnership.
The big problem with leaving Labour in for another term is that I think it will give way to a bigger support to the likes of the BNP. At least with the Tories it’s a case of better the devil you know.
The whole concept of paternal leave is F_cking bonkers!
My Dad was given the afternoon off work to go the hospital when I was born. That should be about it. Leave motherhood to Mothers, and leave the Fathers to go and earn a living.
As for same sex partners, this is just PC drivel to keep in line with an already utterly preposterous concept.
Doesn’t ANYONE actually work any more?
There speaks someone whose never had kids!
Iain Duncan Smith as David Cameron’s families minister has already stated he will make it harder for gay couples to adopt and for lesbians to get IVF. So what David Cameron is really saying is if you get through all the obstructions his own IDS puts in your way he will allow you the rights everybody else has.
He might as well just of announced that to get your rights you must walk across a minefield blindfolded! Because when you see the Tory position on this in the whole and not just this one sound bite it amounts to the same thing.
Squidgy: “There speaks someone whose never had kids!”
There speaks someone who doesn’t want the little bastards either. ;)
Who pays for all this leave? Either the companies who often can ill-afford it, or the government, so yet again, the taxpayer not only has to fork out for one person, but now TWO. That’s 18 months worth of pay courtesy of yours truly, just so they can have a sprog. It’s obscene. If these people want time off, go ahead, but pay your own way.
Don’t buy Tory snake oil. This man voted against the repeal of section 28. His party of homophobes have voted against every single push for gay rights there has ever been. Don’t buy his spin, don’t trust his lies
When his party’s votes match his rhetoric I’ll be more inclined to believe him
yes sparky they voted against everything – like Civil Partnerships in Churches for instance?
parental leave should be fair to both parents
it’s BS and meaningless if not
Will theotherone never understand anything! The whole point about civil partnerships, like civil marriage, is that they cannot take place in a religious setting, nor can they contain religious language. That is what is meant by the word ‘civil’ in this context. This is why there should be no problem at all regarding civil marriage for gay people because of the complete exclusion of all religious connotations. The religious element is a very different matter, and I welcome the vote in the House of Lords in this connection.
Crap, I spent all of last night trying to get pregnant as I fancied 6 weeks off…..turns out my tubes are blocked. Oh, and I have a large penis instead of a vag. Discrimination!!
Not good enough Cameron.
I want to get MARRIED!!
How considerate that gay/lesbian husbands and wives can enjoy such equality when it comes to maternity and paternity issues.
Thank you David Cameron.
Oh no – sorry – gay/lesbian *civil partners. Whoops my error.
If you remember, this is the same interview in which Cameron said:
“…the ideal adoption is finding a mum and a dad, but there will be occasions when gay couples make very good adoptive parents. So I support gay adoption”.
In other words, LGBT people will do if we can’t find anything better ie. straight.
Parental leave should of course be dealt out on a non-discriminatory basis but lots of it is not the sensible route to follow. Generous paternity leave inevitably deskills people and keeps them out of the labour market. Economic productivity for parents is much more enhanced by providing state-subsidised creches for the preschool children of anyone who works. Childcare in the UK is patchy and unaffordable for anyone on ordinary wages. We need to invest money to make money, including tax money. Both ‘Right’ and ‘Left’ should have worked this one out.
Mumbo Jumbo – I think thats enough. There are certain situations where gay adoption wouldn’t be appropiate ie if a young child lost both mother and father it would be cruel to put that child with gay parents to then be subject to ridicule while also trying to cope with grief.
Granted that IDS is a confirmed (pun intended) catholic homophobe, would it not be a service for the voters to find out from Call Me Dave whether he does,, or does not, intend to put into effect IDS’s proposals to make it more difficult for Lesbians to have access to IVF and the other changes built around the unpleasant concept of the “heterosexual reality”. Dave needs to spell out very clearly whether this is Tory party policy or not. I hope those of us on this board who are more ardent supporters of the Tory party than I personally find myself able to be can help us all with the factual answer to this question.
I reckon even if he did, there’s a lot here that just wouldn’t be interested and scream him down, so what’s the point.
Besides that gay issues are only a small part for voting on. There is a Lot more besides.
I absolutely disagree with mass creches. I’m sure pretty much any expert on child development will tell you that quality time with parents is what children need. And as for productivity, I forget which one, but there was a northern European country that experienced a surge in productivity after equalising maternal and paternal leave. By not forcing women to single-handedly look after the baby in its early stages, men and women were allowed to share the task. With women returning to work sooner, they were able to minimise the risks of falling behind in their professions, which was obviously a boon to the economy.
I really, really wish I could remember which country this was, because I don’t like asking people to believe any old story as fact. Still, take out the “truthiness” and it still works as a hypothesis, right?
“The Tories would allow both parents to take up to 26 weeks off together and this would apply to couples who adopt or use artificial insemination.” –
What about surrogacy, foster parenting and other methods of parenting??????
Also what is it with “maternity leave” and “paternity leave”???
These two terms are outdated as the rocks underneath my fingernails.
- These days it is called “parental leave”!!!!!!
AM I RIGHT??????
Oh almost forgot -
There is also “adoption leave” and “partnered leave” as well.
GOOD NEWS: From 1 April 2010 in the UK, gay men who arrange [altrustic] surrogacy arragements with women will have the same rights (such as the “full prosuption of parentage” and the “trasfer of parentage”) see the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008.
This was the same law that allowed “IVF access” and “parentage rights” for lesbians who underwent ART nearly one year ago. It was a shame that the law was not retrospective (meaning it only applies to children concieved from or AFTER 1 April 2009 and not to children before that date) – as for example it is fully retrospective in nearly all places in my home country Australia, except for South Australia which still in 2010 bans access to surrogacy and IVF for both singles and gay couples).