Reader comments · Ed Miliband calls for marriage equality describing civil partnerships as “not good enough” · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Labour Leadership Contest

Ed Miliband calls for marriage equality describing civil partnerships as “not good enough”

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. I like Ed Miliband he has far more substance about him that this brother David, who has far too much of Tony Blair about him for my liking.

    But I fear (no)Balls and Abbott will split his vote handing the Labour leadership to the Tony Blair clone! :(

  2. Stuart Neyton 25 Aug 2010, 5:02pm

    “But I fear (no)Balls and Abbott will split his vote”

    Labour leadership elections are done with AV so this can’t, thankfully, be the case.

    Although i’m backing Andy Burnham, i think Ed Miliband would be far better leader of the labour party than his brother, who represents the worst parts of the new labour project. I’m glad he’s now come out in favour of same-sex marriage (i hadn’t realised if he had done previously).

  3. “Mr Miliband concluded that he recognised LGBT people, rather than politicians, were at the frontline in the fight for equality….”

    Wasn’t quite sure what he meant by this comment, I think might have missed the point? Yes LGBT folk but I don’t think inequality in marriage for instance isn’t going to come about without him pulling his finger out and doing something in parliament with all the other guys who have come out in support of it….

    And also a fair amount of non LGBT folk/charities/orgs think this discrimination is wrong….

    Didn’t the times say 61% of British people were in favour. PArliament and the people have moved on, get on with it and do something to change the law in this parliament …

    I’ve seen no parliamentary questions from any lab mp on equal marriage yet, no hint at private bills , no preliminary discussion on the topic within parliament – didn’t someone say the consultation period was a year or so… just get on with it…

  4. And yet it was a Labour government that gave us Civil Unions and not full marriage because they weren’t prepared to take on the social conservatives and religious bigots. Making big hearted statements is so much easier in opposition.

  5. Craig Nelson 26 Aug 2010, 12:31am

    It’s important to remember that at the time of Civil Partnerships very few people were advocating marriage equality. Having Civil Partnerships and adoption and IVF rights has put us in a good position to gain full equaity. Had Labour won the election we would still be starting to look at the issue.

  6. But Craig, marriage equality was always the main question asked to all parties prior to the election, don’t you remember Brown’s answer to it when he was asked – he said we had to balance it with relgious views. I’m glad these guys have different views but I’m not sure what they intend to do about getting marriage equality a reality.

    I don’t quite believe people were not advocating marriage equality until now. CPs have always been assumed to be marriages in name only, the press refer to them as getting married. Marriage equality is not new.Lord lester stated in the debate of CPs that he wanted marriage equality but parliament and the people had the right then to say they weren’t quite ready. I think we are now ready!

    The lib dems are making CP and marriage equality part of their official policy, I think they said they would try to bring it in during this parliament. If so will the labour party support it or will they find some excuse that it’s not exactly how they would have done it. Rememebr the CP was a lib dem initiative in the first place, it was lord lester’s and stonewall joint initiative, not labours….

    I doubt very much if lab would be talking about marriage equality if they had won the election, they have been forced thankfully to change their mind….

  7. That’s a tantalising comment, what exactly does the confused IP address think and want to ask – if it’s the same IP address that was linked back to Stonewall then I thought they had already refused to make any comment , presumably sticking to the viewpoint given by Summerskill back in June 2009 to PN… We were all genuinely dying to know their viewpoints, especially after eveybody else seems to be now in favour of marriage equality, instead we were given the F*$k you sign…..

  8. “I’d like to say what I think and ask questions but I fear the comment may be tracked and my IP address published ”

    The person using the name Confused was identified as posting from a Stonewall address when the results of the Pink News survey came out.

    Quite frankly if he/she wants to post anonymously on behalf of the homophobic Stonewall organisation then he/she should be identified.

    If Stonewall are so cowardly and out of touch that they refuse to engage with the community they claim (falsely) to represent, then quite frankly they should be exposed when they try to muddy debates.

    Stonewall is a homophobic organisation. Their input is no longer desired or required by the 98% of the LGBT population who support LGBT equality.

  9. Actually – if this person ‘Confused’ works for Stonewall then either he is a complete an utter moron. Or alternatively he is openly sneering at the LGBT population.

    He is an utter moron if he cannot grasp how offensive civil partnsership is.

    He is a sneering,homophobic bigot if he is logging on here simply to laugh at those of us who support equality.

    F*** off Stonewall.

    You should disband!

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.