Reader comments · David Cameron ‘not planning’ to legalise full gay marriage despite pledge to ‘consider’ it · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

General Election 2010

David Cameron ‘not planning’ to legalise full gay marriage despite pledge to ‘consider’ it

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Dave North 4 May 2010, 11:45am

    “Mr Cameron replied: “I am not planning that. I think civil partnerships are an excellent thing because they give gay people the opportunity to form a partnership and have SOME of the advantages of marriage”

    Oh I see, throwing us dirty poofs a few bread crumbs. How nice of you. Not quite equal or good enough for marriage are we.

    No surprises here then.

  2. Presumably the Conservatives and Dave are not going to allow full “Gay Marriage”, because prospective Tory MP Philippa Stroud’s answer to homosexuality is to cure it through prayer.

    As highlighted in the Telegraph and Observer Newspapers . . .

  3. John(Derbyshire) 4 May 2010, 12:08pm

    Its no surprise,is it? Ominous threats though-about removing the right to have gay unions blessed in church. God help us all on Friday.

  4. If the Tories get into power then times are going to get a lot more difficult for LGBT rights.

    Neo-fascist scum like Philippa Stroud has not been sacked (never mind arrested) for her abuse of vulnerable young people in her care.

    Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling faces no consequences for his support of businesses illegally denying goods and services to gay people.

    Voting for the Tories is the equivalent of voting for George Bush.

    Let’s just hope for all our sakes that there is a hung parliament so the LibDems will be able to temper the vicious homophobia of the Tory Law and Justice Party.

    The Tories hate gay people. They always have. And they still do, despite the bags of lies that the snake-oil salesman David Cameron keeps telling.

  5. I’m shocked at just how quickly they u-turned on this. I think this says one thing clearly: we cannot trust the Tories to protect our rights, or others.

    I’m terrified of the outcome on Friday.

  6. To the Editor of Pink News – when are we going to see Gordon Brown’s answers to our questions?

  7. 666incarnate 4 May 2010, 12:35pm

    what is it with the gays of this country.?
    the goverment have bigger fish to fry and worry about other than pampering to the needs of the needy brigade that blight these comment rooms
    Get a life, more important things to worry about than gay marriages etc etc….drama queens the lot of you

  8. A homosexual vote for the tories is like a turkey voting for christmas!

  9. @7: 666incarnate. You’re an ar*e. We’re voting on lots of issues, and if people want to put who they are, LGBT rights, at the top of that list, it isn’t for someone like you to tell people that they are wrong.

    ….You don’t meet many black people saying “I know the BNP want to smash my head in but if they can fix the pavements they’ve got my vote.”


  10. I pity everyone of this country if the Tories get in on Friday – just thank god I’m immigrating!

  11. Well said, Jonathan2!

    People who are still undecided how to vote, or who don’t know how to vote tactically in order to keep the anti-gay Fundamentalist Christian Tories OUT, should go to the following site and stick their postcodes in the box up in the right-hand top corner.

    Please pass this message on to everybody you know.

  12. well dont Emmigrate! to Uganda; Jamaica; Iran or any other homphobic Twat country!!

  13. Leon K Fox 4 May 2010, 1:50pm

    666incarnate, I’m sure you’d care if it affected you, bastard.

  14. It’s a shame that I, an American average Joe without a blog or a journalism degree, was the first to post on this website, AN ENGLISH WEBSITE, that Cameron had completely and emphatically denied the report from the so-called “Conservative LGBT Manifesto” that the Conservatives would “consider” marriage equality. In fact he went one step further and made it very clear that they would NOT consider such a thing and that gay people having (HIS words), “SOME of the advantages of marriage” was sufficient. For all of you who claim that CP’s are the same as marriage with all of the same rights and benefits, please explain why Mr. Cameron, who surely knows more about English law than ANY of you, would so publicly and emphatically declare that CP’s give only “SOME” of the advantages of marriage?

    He even said that we should “look to the future CAUTIOUS about WHETHER we can build on that [CP’s].”

    Did everyone hear that? He’s saying that he is even cautious about considering whether or not Civil Partnerships can be improved upon. In the SAME breath that he tells us that CP’s offer SOME of the advantages of marriage he tells us that we should be CAUTIOUS of WHETHER we can expand on those Civil Partnerships. How does ANYONE take him seriously that he believes in EQUAL rights for gay people or that he wants to advance gay rights when he LOUDLY and publicly tells you that you are getting only some of the advantages of straight people and he’s satisfied with that and afraid to even consider improving the discrepancies?

    Sounds like Britain is going to elect their very own “fierce advocate” who’s all hugs and kisses on the campaign trail but will act as if he’s never heard of you, and will even turn and stab you in the back just like Obama has by ignoring our issues at best and stabbing us in the back when he so viciously and homophobically defended DADT and the Defense of Marriage Act in the courts, comparing gay people to criminals and our relationships to incest and bestiality. That was OBAMA’S Department of Justice that did that. I fear that England is in for the same treatment if Cameron is elected.

  15. Zeke, thanks for your post above. What you found was yet another example of lying Call-Me-Dave’s backwards-and-forwards dance on LGBT issues.

    Let me present again his rather pathetic dance so far:

    In 1999 William Hague sacked Conservative frontbencher Shaun Woodward for refusing to back the party’s stance that Section 28 should not be repealed. (Remember that the Tory’s Section 28 of 1989 effectively gagged any employee of a school from giving any impression to students that homosexuality was OK.)

    In 2000 while David Cameron was campaigning for the seat of Witney he wrote a letter in The Telegraph attacking Shaun Woodward for his pro-gay stance. He also attacked Tony Blair too for his being pro-gay rights. These are Call-Me-Dave’s actual words from that time: “The Blair government continues to be obsessed with their fringe agenda, including deeply unpopular moves like repealing Section 28 and allowing the promotion of homosexuality in schools. . . Blair has moved heaven and earth to allow the promotion of homosexuality in schools”. Do you really believe that the leopard has completely changed his spots simply because he now needs our votes and is saying, “Trust me!”?

    In 2003 David Cameron MP fought against and voted against the Labour Government’s repeal of Section 28 in the House of Commons.

    By 2005 Say-Anything-Dave has done a complete turnabout and he tells the BBC he’s delighted Section 28 has been abolished! He told a BBC journalist: “At the end of the day, one section of our community did feel discriminated against by Section 28, and so I’m glad on that basis that it’s gone”

    In 2008 Cameron voted against a law making it easier for lesbian couples to have IVF treatment. He says that this issue goes to the heart of his message that Britain’s society is broken. Are we now to believe, just two years later in 2010, that Cameron no longer believes that “Britain’s society is broken” and that we LGBTs are not to blame for it?

    In 2009 Call-Me-Dave decides to appear at a gay pride event and say sorry to us for the ban on anything that might be construed as a positive view of homosexuality in schools. He said “Yes, we may have sometimes been slow and, yes, we may have made mistakes, including Section 28, but the change has happened”. It was an apology but there was little real remorse in it. Was it not just a clever preparation for wooing us for our votes in 2010?

    Having delivered this “I’m weally weally sorry”, just two months later in 2009 Tory MEPs refused to go along with a cross-party European Parliament vote to condemn a homophobic law that had been passed in Lithuania!

    Then earlier this year, in 2010, in his interview with Attitude, Call-Me-Dave criticised the Church of England over its attitudes to homosexuality and called upon the Church to accept equal rights for gays.

    But a little later, in April 2010, Call-Me-Dave’s Shadow Home Secretary Christopher Grayling is revealed by The Observer newspaper as having said that he feels sympathy for those businesses who wish to turn gay, lesbian, or transgender people away – despite it being against the law to do so. Cameron fails to discipline his colleague and a few days later yet another Tory candidate, Andrew Bridgen, says much the same thing as Christopher Grayling said. Cameron similarly fails to discipline Bridgen. Both Grayling and Bridgen continue as Tory candidates in the election despite having shown support for the “right” of businesses to turn gays, lesbians, and trans people away.

    On April 10th 2010, Call-Me-Dave sought to woo gay and lesbian voters in an article written for PinkNews. He said that if they were in Civil Partnerships they would be eligible for the £3 a week he was promising to married heterosexuals (provided they are on a low wage). He also promised the possibility of “a clean slate” to anyone who had a “gay-sex offence” on their records. The only other thing he offered in his article was the sentiment that he was “heart and soul” behind gay rights and that LGBTs should simply trust him! However, Call-Me-Dave’s record since he ditched his seven-year position as Director of Corporate Affairs at Carlton Communications (a major media company) to “find a seat” in politics does not inspire confidence.

    On 13th April, the Tories published their manifesto. It was completely and alarmingly without specific plans to progress and preserve rights for LGBTs. Throughout this very long and very carefully prepared document there is not a single section of any length devoted to how the Tories will assist the LGBT minority.

    On 14th April, Christopher Grayling, the man the Tories would have as their Home Secretary, sought to reverse the damage he had done to the Tories as a result of being secretly recorded as saying that he feels sympathy for those businesses who wish to turn same-sex couples away. He went on Channel 4 and said that “I don’t think that people who are gay should be turned away”.

    On 27th April it was revealed that Tory candidate Philip Lardner wrote on his website “The promotion of homosexuality by public bodies . . . was correctly outlawed by Mrs Thatcher’s government. Toleration and understanding is one thing, but state-promotion of homosexuality is quite another.” In the run-up to the election these words and others were hastily removed by Lardner. He was criticised in 2008 for calling the racist former leader of Rhodesia Ian Smith his hero. Lardner was quickly suspended by the Conservatives and Call-Me-Dave tried to curry favour with the LGBT community by comparing the Tories with the world’s worst anti-gay political parties. He said that at least the Tories have “gone further than many other parties around the world.”

    In the week before the General Election, in May 2010, it was revealed that at least 37 Tory candidates had strong links with fundamentalist Christian organizations and that one of them, Mrs. Philippa Stroud, had participated in fundamental Christian rituals whereby prayers were said in order to cast demons from homosexual persons. Furthermore, it was revealed by The Guardian newspaper that Mrs. Stroud has been the head of the Tory party’s “think-tank” determining Tory policy on “Social Justice”. Mrs. Stroud has thus presided over many formulations of Tory policy in matters relating to “social justice”.

    In the same week Mrs. Theresa May, a senior Tory, stated that if elected the Tories would “consider” renaming Civil Partnerships as Marriage so that gays and lesbians would enjoy full equality with heterosexuals in this regard. Later the same day in an interview with Sky News, Call-Me-Dave said that he would NOT consider the action that had been outlined by Mrs. May. It is likely that this back-tracking was due to pressure exerted on Cameron by his Christian Fundamentalist backers and supporters, one of whom, Kenneth Costa, the Chairman of one of the largest financial consultancies in the world, has made a significant contribution to Tory Party funds and is also the mastermind behind the UK’s nationwide “Alpha Course”, a fundamental Christian course aimed at converting young people to Christianity.

    I have no objection to anyone copying and pasting my above record anywhere they like. Get this record out there so that people can see the reality of the Conservative Party.

  16. Is any party promising to do so? I believe the answer to that is “no”.

    The headline should perhaps read “no change of gay marriage, no matter who you vote for”.

  17. And this a surprise to who exactly???

  18. When I came out in 1983 I had a strong sense of freedom and liberation because I didn’t have to conform to dreary heterosexual norms. In other words the pressure to pair off with a member of the opposite sex, get married and have 2.4 kids. That feeling continued until about 1995.

    Be warned, this freedom is what we risk giving up. Just so a tiny number of insecure people who had a religious upbringing and are absolutely desperate to fit in at all costs and please their families can have a gay wedding in a church.

    The pressure will then be on in all kinds of ways for all of us to ‘settle down’ and do the ‘right’ thing. Any other kind of lifestyle will be frowned on. You can see this already with politicians offering tax cuts to those who are in civil partnerships. Something that will benefit only around 2% of the 3.6m in the UK who are believed to be gay or lesbian: just 70,000 are in a civil partnership.

    How many will get ‘married’? 1%? 0.5%? 0.25% This is an issue that affects hardly any of us except possibly in a negative way.

  19. Peter Rivendell 4 May 2010, 4:28pm

    There has been no noticeable opposition to this discriminatory piece of Labour legislation and only the Conservatives are being questioned on upgrading this to a complete apeing of heterosexual marriage? That’s hardly a consistent agenda on the part of our so-called community.

  20. Despite considering voting Tory, I am not planning to do so.

    Nor would I. Ever.

  21. Jonathan2 4 May 2010, 5:04pm

    Let’s stop the Tories getting in, then if Labour, or Labour/LibDem are in we can fight to get these things sorted. It won’t be possible to even discuss Gay rights legislation with the Tories – they will be “considering” it for 5 years.

    And, to be honest, the sorts of rights we’ve got have been down to Stonewall and other people (Peter T), etc. Most of us haven’t actively been involved. We should get more involved – it would be good for all of us.

    Root out homophobia and discrimination from public services and public life.

    Reform our schools to tackle homophobia & transphobia

    Outlaw incitement to homophobic hatred in all forms
    (reverse the so-called Waddington amendment which saw Tory Lords water down our legislation to protect people from incitement to homophobic hate.) Amend the Equalities Bill/Act to provide explicit protection against harassment of LGBTI people.)

    Compulsory, inclusive sex and relationship education (removing the opt-out)
    Ensure anyone who was convicted of a homosexual offence which was subsequently decriminalised will have the opportunity to have their names removed from the sex offenders register and /or the police national computer on application.

    Continue the campaign in the UN for the Universal Decriminalisation of Homosexuality
    focusing on the 9 countries where it is still punishable by death;…an_homosexuals
    Homosexuality is punishable by death in Iran, and human rights groups estimate some 4,000 gays have been executed since the Islamic revolution in 1979.”

    Use Britain’s unique strength in the world and of our international alliances to fight for our values, to challenge homophobia, promote equality and ensure other governments deliver LGBT equality.

    Push for the rewriting of the Mental Health Act to remove trans people from the Psychiatric Disorder Register.

    Gibraltar to equalise the gay age of consent

    Ensure that all British embassies around the world are licensed to carry out civil partnership ceremonies.

    Replace Civil Partnerships with Marriage.
    Note that Marriage is a secular legal notion. Weddings are religious ceremonies. There’s no need to have Civil Partnerships if they’re supposed to be exactly the same as Marriage. Is there?

    Make sure that asylum applications from Gay people fleeing persecution are treated fairly
    Recognising that many Gay people face torture and can face death in some counties. Ending deportations of LGBT refugees to countries where they face persecution

    Campaign against any reduction in the AIDS/HIV budget and target health promotion work to prevent sexually transmitted infections.

    Push for the rewriting of the Mental Health Act to remove trans people from the Psychiatric Disorder Register.

    End the blanket, lifetime ban on gay and bisexual blood donors

    Oppose all opt-outs from equality and anti-discrimination laws by religious organisations
    …and remove special treatment allowing faith schools to promote homophobia on the grounds of religion.

    Comprehensive training for teachers and educational staff on all diversity and inclusion issues;
    .. schools to promote equal opportunities in their anti-bullying procedures; equalities issues to be monitored in teaching recruitment.

    Require all police forces to have LGBT Liaison Officers
    .. with paid time allocated within their work schedules to tackle homophobic and transphobic hate crime.

    Refuse visas and work permits to “murder music” singers and others who incite homophobic and transphobic violence.

    Increasing LGBT representation in Parliament

    Civil partnerships without borders
    Campaign to ensure that same-sex partnerships to be recognised throughout Europe and internationally.

  22. Oh Eddy that was a wonderful post, I really enjoyed reading it. Thanks for taking the time to write it.

  23. Typical Tory … can’t even wait for the election before they start to break their ‘promises’ … but then only a total numpty would take anything they say as a ‘promise’

  24. Thank you, Mithos.


  25. Jonathan2, quite right, there is no need to have civil partnerships if as Cameron claims they are the same as marriage with “a few differences”. That admission alone is proof positive they are NOT equal. How dumb can Cameron be? Now that he’s backtracked, we now know we’ll NEVER get that freedom for those of us who want it under a Tory government and probably not a Labour one either.

    As far as having civil partnerships recognised across the EU, NOT going to happen. For one thing, quite a few countries have no form of any same-sex union and those that do have varying degrees of rights that aren’t necessarily reciprocal. Take ours and the French version which has far fewer rights than a CP. What would be the point of say for example, a British gay partnered couple residing in France for business or any other reason, they would NOT enjoy the same rights enjoyed at home in the UK some of which aren’t included in the French version (PACs). Its futile to think that CPs would be universally recognised in the EU, its just not feasible in light of the vast differences in member states. In those states that provide no same-sex rights, I don’t see how we can expect them to recognise ours if their own gay people have nothing. Its too politically charged.

    As for international recognition…..CP’s will never be the gold standard, just not going to happen. We’re outnumbered by marriage and don’t forget, 8 countries, soon to be 9 with Finland next year with full marriage equality, CP’s don’t stand a chance of gaining such recognition. Its a waste of time fighting for it. What we should be doing is fighting for the right to marry if we don’t want to form a CP, there is no reason not to given the current trend in the more progressive countries that will only continue to grow. Denmark, Iceland, France and Germany will probably get their before we do, assuming we ever will which is unlikely.

  26. Have all these guys lost what the main gay issue is in the UK. I can’t believe Stonewall saying CPs are fine, whose side are they on. CPs are not the same as marriage , they don’t have the same status here or abroad.. they are an inferior version, a contract and the only thing we have , so that’s why we do them, if we had a choice, then most of us would opt for a marriage…By the vote I’m sticking to lib dems and nothing has convinced me yet that Lab will do mcuh more the cons about the main issue….They had 15 yrs of a majority govt and still we are not considered the same as straights… no gay marriage from them and no prospect of it

  27. GS, the vast majority of women don’t have abortions. Even the vast majority of women who become pregnant don’t have, or even want an abortion. That shouldn’t make it illegal for those who do want, need, require it.

    It shouldn’t matter to you one bit if 95% of gay couples want to get married or if .095% of gay couples want to get married. The issue is not about whether or not a person takes advantage of a right. The important thing is that the right is there for them to embrace IF they choose to or not.

    In many western countries, including America, the majority of people don’t vote. This is particularly true of racial minorities. By your logic their voting rights should be taken away.

    I hope you realize the difference between not wanting have something for yourself and not wanting ANYONE to have the option of having it. Unfortunately your comments lead me to believe that you either don’t understand the difference or, worse yet, you do know the difference and you’re selfish enough to want the government to deny a right to others just because you personally don’t care for it.

    I hope the former rather than the latter is true and upon further consideration you might change your mind, at least as far as opening up the legal option for others.

  28. Alan No. 23 and Zeke No. 239, well said! I couldn’t have said it better. StonewallUK is the arch culprit as to why we get NO full marriage equality. It does NOT speak for all gays and even if it did, it still should be fighting for those of us who choose to marry, but it doesn’t because it deludes itself into thinking CPs are just as good. Well, they’re NOT and that explains why other countries aren’t rushing to imitate us, except Ireland which will confer even fewer rights. Eight countries all have identical civil marriage equality and growing. That alone speaks for itself. All this nonsense about trying to get CPs universally recognised isn’t going to happen and it shouldn’t, an exercise in futility. Arrogant in a way!

  29. 666incarnate 4 May 2010, 11:59pm

    @jonathan2 (9)

    just like everyone else on here you munter freedom of speech is still allowed and wether munters like you dont like what i say…do i really give a toss??? the answer is NO.
    LGBT people are way down ANY goverments list of priorities right now and none of them give a damn about us.
    They all mean well in what they say but in reality they couldn’t give a S*** about the LGBT Community, come to think of it a lot of the LGBT communtiy dont give a S*** also so why bother.

    Well, i done my postal vote and it aint for any of the mainstream parties i prefer the underdogs they bite better…

  30. Jean-Paul 5 May 2010, 3:39am

    Call me suspicious, but there’s a conspiracy going on to keep Philippa Stroud out of the mainstream newspaper.

    Can’t imagine why.

  31. Mihangel apYrs 5 May 2010, 7:35am

    @ GS et al:

    Civil Partnerships are important for people in committed relationships (of whatever mould) NOT for the fluffy wedding, and pressies, and respectability, but for the all the securities i tbrings in terms of recognition as being next of kin, inheritance issues that help preclude someone being made homeless after their parners death, pension issues, indeed the whole interdependance thing! A lot can be done by multiple legal documents; but a CP certificate removes all that. BTW we’ve been sold CP as being equal to marriage: obviously “Dave” doesn’t think it is. I wonder what he sees as the differences, and what horrors may eventually come out in the the passage of time.

    I do agree, though, that we still have a lot of things to deal with.

  32. Colm,No. 16. Exactly right about that! As for that other nitwit Gordon Brown saying that marraige is tied up with religious freedom, he is dead WRONG! Civil marriage has absolutely NOTHING to do with marriage. Obviously Brown and Cameron haven’t read the gender neutral marriage laws in eight countries that have them as well as those in five states in America. There is a clause giving religious denominations an exemption and they are NOT bound to recognise any same-sex civil marriage let alone perform them. Both Brown and Cameron are both kowtowing to the religious bigots, and StonewallUK is quite content to approve of a ban on civil marriage equality. We need to start a counter movement to take on the bigotry and support of anti same-sex marriage attitude of StonewallUK and give them a run for their money. StonewallUK does NOT speak for all of us and should instead be striving to make sure that those of us who would rather marry should be allowed to in the interests of FULL equality. Civil Partnerships are fine for those who want them but they are NOT about FULL equality, ever. The fact that there are some parts of the CP law that do not convey every right of marriage is proof positive they are not equal, even Cameron admits there are some discrepancies. I find it rich that some very vocal supporters of civil partnerships and foes of same-sex marriage often consider themselves “married”, yet are opposed to the very concept of same-sex marriage. Why is it that same-sex marriage now far outnumbers civil partnership in several countries if the latter are supposed to be equal?

  33. Thanks Laurie Roberts for that URL to the Channel 4 article asking how on earth it can be that the Philippa Stroud story has gone untouched by the much of the mainstream media.

    As the Channel 4 article states, Philippa Stroud is the person in charge of one of the Tory government’s most important think-tanks and she has presided over and assisted in the formulation of much Tory policy, and yet it has been found she fervently believes that LGBTs are possessed by demons and that these demons can be driven out by prayer! Furthermore, it is understood that SHE HERSELF has participated in such rituals, or as some have pointed out such acts of ritual abuse.

    We can only deduce that beneath their up-front posturings much of the mainstream media are inclined NOT to publish anything that could seriously damage Cameron’s chances of winning.

    Britain: a land of true democracy? Crap. The organization concerned with evaluating every country in the world for transparency and lack of corruption put New Zealand at the top of the list, followed by Sweden and Denmark. The UK is not perfect. What the UK, particularly England, IS perfect at though is putting it about all over the globe that it IS a perfect democracy and a land without corruption.

  34. @ Mihangel apYrs – I support civil partnerships and particularly the rights they give people. I had an elderly friend who went through the whole thing of not being recognised as a partner in a relationship. Marriage is completely different and by endorsing that we’re opening up a whole can of worms.

    @ Zeke – your starting point seems to be that ‘marriage’ is entirely a good thing. If that was the case then fine I’d be happy for anyone to get married and there would be no consequences for the rest of us. However there are negatives. For a start, us supporting marriage just props up the church and a system that has been oppressing us for centuries. At the root of it all, the people who want marriage are desperate not to be any different to heterosexuals and that has knock on consequences for all of those LGBT people who just can’t manage to be like a heterosexual.

    What we’re heading for is a little clique of ultra ‘respectable’ church-going gays who are married, get the tax breaks, adopt, work in ‘gay jobs’ and support authoritarian measures against anyone who doesn’t conform to what they have decided is ‘right’ – that being some kind of 1950’s ‘honey-I’m-home’ lifestyle. While the majority of lGBT people are left out in the cold.

    Already you can already see the way these people are turning on those who don’t conform: for example take the ‘cruising crackdowns’ that are supported by gay charities and gay politicians. Something which would have been unthinkable 25 years ago.

    In a nutshell, the more this minority ingratiate themselves into the straight world the more everyone else suffers. And these are the people who control our gay events, charities and organisations.

  35. Robert in S. Kensington 1 Feb 2013, 12:14am

    Wait a minute. This article seems to be badly written. CPs aren’t marriages, never have been never will be. What does it matter if they can’t be upgraded to be called marriages in spite of what might have been said or suggested by the government? They’re not marriages and they wouldn’t even be construed as marriages in 11 countries where we can actually marry. Let’s concentrate on getting equal civil marriage passed on Tuesday. There are some CP’d couples who think their unions are enough. Fine, now let us get on with legalising equal marriage for those who want it. The two can coexist just as PACS and equal civil marriage in France will.

  36. Robert in S. Kensington 1 Feb 2013, 12:16am

    Another thing, ‘considering’ something is not the same as saying something is definitely going to happen. Stop whining and just get on with equal civil marriage. Nobody is forcing anyone to have a CP or a marriage, there will be choice for gay couples. Some of us don’t like CPs, some of us don’t like marriage. So what? The two can exist just as they will in France and everywhere else where we can marry. What is so special about CPs anyway? There is no universal standard for them and no demand either.

  37. Gay Activist Paul Mitchell 1 Feb 2013, 2:20am

    The GOVERNMENT bill has already been introduced to the House of Commons and passed the FIRST READING!

    Now is he David Cameron having second thoughts on equal marriages?

    The bill needs to be amended to convert all existing civil partnerships to Civil marriages and include both adultery and consulmation of marriages that is inline with heterosexual current marriages!

    Equality is equality!

    Equality comes with equal responsibilities too!

    Define gay sex as “mutual masturbation, fallatio (sucking of the penis) and anal sex between town males that is with or without a condom over the age of sixteen (16) inline with the age of consent set out in the UK Sexual Offences Act 2003.

    1. Replace “town” with:

      “Two (2) or more males”

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.