Remarkable , even the BBC and Sky news are reporting the event this year , I think we have passed a new bench mark in Gay Pride and emancipation of our annual festival. Happy Pride.
It would be great if the coalition government legalised gay marriage.
It wouldn’t be difficult because (a) the majority of the public support it and (b) we already have civil partnerships which shluld act as a spring for a move to full marriage equality.
Excellent Support news from Our Boris!!
I happen to know that he is lying
There are lots of anti gay people posting here..
Of course you do Paul.
the headline should read “Boris begins his re- election campaign”, still it is nice to get some good news for a change :)
still hardly any news coverage , as usual very disappointing representation
Superb, superb, superb
Good on you!
It’s a shame she isn’t saying a step closer to gay marriage, Nick’s Clegg message today was also pushing for gay marriage
Sat, 03 Jul 2010
The Leader of the Liberal Democrats celebrates London Pride’s 40th anniversary.
Pride London is a special event with a proud tradition of 40 years – fighting, working and protesting for change, for recognition, for equality.
The Liberal Democrats are passionate supporters of equality for the LGBT community and strong supporters of Pride London. That’s why we have been clear on opposing Section 28, supporting equal adoption rights, promoting civil partnerships, PUSHING FOR GAY MARRIAGE, working against homophobic bullying and banning discrimination in the workplace.
I’m especially proud that the in the new Government it is Liberal Democrat MP Lynne Featherstone who is the new Minister for Equalities. In Lynne you have an effective champion who will work for equality for all.
Clegg and Johnson both calling for gay marriage on the same sex. Excellent. What Featherstone is proposing – religious civil partnership ceremonies – would create a strange situation where civil partnerships could be religious however civil marriage could not.
It would be easier at this stage just to legalise same sex marriage and scrap civil partnerships, as they did in Sweden, Iceland and a number of other countries.
As a Labour guy I will of course commend Boris Johnson on his stated support for gay marriage.
This is very good news.
I suspect that if he remained opposing this he would be finished as Mayor of London.
Paul: “I happen to know that he is lying”Citation Needed – EVIDENCE please Paul, don’t just spout bullsh!t unless you have something to back it up.
It would be great if the coalition government legalised gay marriage.
Yes, it would be great it they did.
The Conservative party is dominated by huge right wing religious grouping.
If you look at the cabinet you can see that they occupy all the important roles.
Remember that Boris Johnson is very much separate at the moment because he is running for London Mayor, not for a position in government.
This enables Boris to support equal marriage for gays which, I think, is the only hope he has of remaining mayor in London.
I feel enthused that gay marriage will eventually come to pass , it took us 30 years of campaigning for an equal age of consent , i don’t think gay marriage will take so very long to come , bless you all x
Marriage is a Red Herring and a complete waste of time. Why do you want your emotions rubber stamped? Have some faith in yourself!
“Marriage is a Red Herring and a complete waste of time. Why do you want your emotions rubber stamped? Have some faith in yourself!”.
Whatever. We want same sex marriage.
A couple of live reports on BBC News channel were a pleasant surprise, but unfortunately nothing on the main afternoon news at 5.35pm, and only a 12 second report on BBC London news which followed.
Sky did a long report but has not been repeated , the BBC seem to have a real problem in reporting and covering Pride , it is a shame for those who are elderly , disabled or living remotely and isolated that they are not able to see the event properly represented on the news channels . SHAME on the BBC
“Marriage is a Red Herring and a complete waste of time. Why do you want your emotions rubber stamped? Have some faith in yourself!”
So you say! Whatever your views on whether marriage is right for YOU or not, we should have the equal freedom to choose it if we wish. (Just as heterosexuals can choose to either get married or not).
Anything less is NOT equality.
I’m just remembering all those Labour-supporting prophets of doom on here in the run up to the general election who kept telling us the Tories would bring back Section 28…
Ahhh, I see G, you’re thinking that look complete idiots now maybe?
oops – ‘that they look’
What do the Thatcherites who’ve opposed same sex marriage for years look like?
Do they accept the new Party line?
Do they feel bypassed by history?
Do they feel like hypocrites for years of demanding that we accept second class citizenship?
Do they have the same stupefied expression that typified CP members in 1939 when they heard the Comintern describe Hitler as a ‘man of peace?
Are they dumfounded and speechless? And will they shut up now, or continue to play Thatcher.
Or will they just they trowel another layer of makeup and pretend they were always for SSM?
Do any thatcherites exist anymore? Most of us don’t even know what the phrase means! If they do still exist then they are all probably gone a bit a bit gaga by now… I think the anti tory faction of the gay community need to move on and find a new argument against them? Perhaps the tories have moved on faster than we have!. However, at the moment both lab and tory parties have still not come out for gay marriage, have they, they both seem to be running parallel on everything else as well?. The only major party that seems to be saying the right thing is lib dem, luckily they now have an influence in govt – thank heavens we voted for them and did not get conned into voting for lab again and suffer more years of non progression on the gay marriage front!
transparent electioneering from Boris. This is the man who supported Section 28 and wrote this:
““if gay marriage was OK – and I was uncertain on the issue – then I saw no reason in principle why a union should not be consecrated between three men, as well as two men, or indeed three men and a dog.”
I swear, some people have a very short memory.
Its taken them 40 years to talk , why should we trust a party that is so slow to get the message ? how can we trust such retarded people to run the country ?
tommy and save wainwright – you are typical Labour supporters who think the Tories are some old evil enemy. They have moved on and society has moved on. Boris Johnson may have said some stupid things in the past but he has clearly changed. People change: get over it. The Tories/Lib Dems are the new source for change.
I beg your pardon? , I am no Labour supporter , why would I support a party that ran the country on Thatcherite principles ? wash your mouth out , The Proof of the pudding is in the eating , the con dems know that their tenure in government is at best “fragile” and are already wooing voters for the next election, gay tories are an anachronism and should be ashamed of themselves.
Please woo us some more! I like what I’m hearing, who cares about Stonewall’s past voting records on the Tory MPs (they were the opposition after all and it’s not that surprising they would vote against any lab policy – I wonder how lab would vote if they did suggest bringing in gay marriage?) and past comments by various people , if they don’t take any rights from us and progress on gay marriage and the other things they are saying then they will probably get the gay vote – any reason WHY NOT?
I just had circular email from Human Rights Peter Tatchell (not sure how or why?) stating – “His (boris Johnson) call for marriage equality was echoed by the openly lesbian Tory MP, Margot James. Marching with Mr Tatchell, she told him that although she supported civil partnerships she also wanted to repeal the ban on lesbian and gay couples getting married in a registry office. ”
IF this is really true then well done on her, I think I like her!
Stonewall is anathema for everything I stand for.
It is one of the quangos that should be shot down. Eradicated.
This organizations appeasement with non equality in the last Government, is why.
So. It’s content with Civil Partnerships.
I’m not. I see that as second fiddle.
I have to go to a registered civil office and hope that the registrar is not a religious bigot.
Not quite what you could call a happy day.
My love for my partner of 14 years, in all honesty does not
need any civil or religious bumf.
It is complete.
However, living our lives as we do, very harmless, 2 dogs, 4 chickens, 90 goldfish, a cat and a a dog.
It does become tiresome being political and religious footballs
to be applauded in the one hand and denigrated in the next.
We go on regardless….
David North: “[Stonewall] is one of the quangos that should be shot down. Eradicated.”
I dislike the people too, but may I point out to you, they are not a Quango, and receive no government funding. They are a registered charity that make all their money from public donations. Trust me, if they were a quango, I WOULD be demanding their closure.
Didn’t they receive a very large amount frommthe welsh and Scottish govt , I thin their 2009 account should a large figure from both places …they don’t get paid directly but must be influenced a certain extent? They also do consultancy works for people so can’t be a true charity completely, although I don’t understand this aspect???
People should NOT be donating money to Stonewall.
Stonewall may not be a ‘quango’ in the official sense but it clearly regards itself as such.
Stonewall’s opposition to marriage equality is one of the reasons that the political parties are so slow to move on issue.
Successive governments seem to be working on the false assumption that Stonewall represents more than their 20,000 members.
Why is it do you think that countries like Spain and Portugal which are more socially conservative and religious were able to achieve equality before Britain?
Well for starters neither country had an ‘official’ gay charity telling the government that a 2nd class civil partnership system would suffice.
I am very glad that Pink News has removed it’s tagline ‘Stonewall Publication of the year’. It was non longer wise for Pink News to ally themselves to a ‘charity’m which believes that gay people deserve 2nd class citizenship.
The horror of it.
Boris Johnson is more supportive of LGBT equality than Stonewall is.
How utterly embarrassing for Stonewall.
They need to close down. Or at least change the name of their organisation. they are cheapening the memory of the Stonewall Riots through their support of homophobic discrimination.
Well done, Boris! Now, if marriage equality materalises, I wonder how the gay naysayers who poo-pooh it will react? I wonder if they’ll get a petition to make sure that the ban on our marrying remains in effect with a bit of help from StonewallUK? They’re outnumbered and they know it.
StephenC, yes, it is deeply embarrassing for StonewallUK, deservedly so and makes their existence that bit more irrelevant. I hope they go under.
Equality is not liberation. Have a long think about marriage. It hasn’t done heterosexuals any favours.
“Equality is not liberation. Have a long think about marriage. It hasn’t done heterosexuals any favours.”.
1. If equality is not liberation, than what is?
2. Actually statistics show that married couples live longer, healthier lives, so I think marriage probably has done heterosexuals a favour.
You are obviously opposed to marriage, for whatever reason, and you are entitled to be, but we are entitled to be in favour, and if get married is a mistake we are entitled to make that mistake.
Dear me, Patrick, have you so soon forgotten the work of the feminist and gay liberationists who got you where you are?
Survey show the two happiest categories are married men and single women. Go figure!
If the telegraph is correct then simply changing the name to marriage may be the simplest solution anyway rather than fannying around , as it states it is ” …a move that although contentious would be easier to legislate for than altering existing laws on civil partnership and civil marriage. ” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7869063/Minister-Lynne-Featherstone-indicates-gay-marriage-a-step-closer.html
Not sure what the logic is but it sounds good to me. As for whether you are happy or not if you are married or whether some gay want it or not isn’t very relevant. The whole parallel existence of two identical laws trying to keep in step with eachother is a waste of time, money and creates inequality. It also prevents bringing in a law which would allow protection for couples who are living together but who do not want to get married. That’s why other countries have CPs/cohabitation law/registered partnerships for both sexes. We shot ourselves in the foot by bringing in a partnership scheme exclusively for gays…What do we do now for those couples who want a looser vers of the thing, who are scared at the thought of the legal consequences of a full marriage/CP…
qv, you’re argument that marriage hasn’t done heterosexual any favours is deeply flawed. For every divorce, there are two or more marriages and I suspect that trend will spill over into civil partnerships. Neither institution is perfect but marriage has survived for millenia in various stages and forms to the present day and is the universal gold standard that provides an enormous amount of rights, benefits and privileges. Unfortunately, civil partnerships will NEVER be the universal norm for gay couples anywhere on this planet, a reality that many in our own community who oppose our right to marry refuse to accept. If you truly believe in full equality, you should be defending our right to marry even if you don’t personally believe in marriage. We don’t exactly oppose the rights of people to form civil partnerships if they so choose and we should expect reciprocity from our foes when it comes to our desire to lift the ban on our marrying which you obviously do not support, a form of homophobia in and of itself. You haven’t grasped what true equality means, separate is never equal for any group of people.
To digress, Argentina begins deliberations on same-sex marriage on July 14 and is expected to pass. If that’s not evidence that same-sex marriage is the trend, I don’t know what is. How long can anyone remain in denial about this. Ask yourself why Argentina including the other nine countries that have marriage equality didn’t opt for civil partnerships if they are so equal?
I hope the eventual trend will be “marriage” and registered/cohabitation/CP/civil unions/PACS etc agreements which will be open to both gays and straights… I suspect those countries which had a CP and now a gay marriage have kept some vers of a civil unions on … most countries its alwas been an inferior vers of a marriage, has looser rights and obligations, less prestige , less meaning etc and that is fine for some no so committed perhpas but not all of us….
Perhaps we should try this concept?
Marriage privatization is the concept that the state should have no authority to define the terms of personal relationships such as marriage. Proponents of marriage privatization claim that such relationships are best defined by private individuals. Arguments for the privatization of marriage have been offered by a number of scholars and writers. These arguments are most often raised in the context of same-sex marriage. Traditionally arguments surrounding the topic of same-sex marriage tend to be in support of same-sex marriage or against same-sex marriage. A third option involves a policy of allowing civil unions for same-sex couples while maintaining marriage exclusively for heterosexual couples. Proponents of marriage privatization often argue that privatizing marriage is a solution to the social controversy over same-sex marriage. Arguments for the privatization of marriage span both liberal and conservative political camps.