Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Gay MP says straight couples face discrimination over hymn Jerusalem

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Is Pink News really using the Daily Mail as a source for its stories? Really??

    And surely the last sentence just goes towards showing what rubbish this view is. Tell me what straight couples honestly know about discrimination.

  2. martyn notman 20 May 2011, 3:16pm

    ok maybe theres a clever point to this im missing? Is he trying to point out the ludicrous situation the whole mess over equality for marriages is in? Otherwise not sure why this is news…

    1. I suspect this is a prequel to a more serious point – I certainly hope so …

      That said I do think marriage equality should include improvements for LGBT partners and straight partners equally

  3. That hymn is atrocious. I am atheist but my partner isn’t and he refuses to sing that jingoistic nonsense.

    1. Spanner1960 20 May 2011, 5:56pm

      That’s interesting, I’m a complete athiest too, and I think it represents everything great about this country.

      However, I’m not a rampant leftie that equates pride in one’s Motherland with racist dogma. It’s called patriotism, something people like you will never comprehend.

      1. Yeah it’s not that bad, you can’t understand any of the words

      2. I have no problem with patriotism but this isn’t patriotism. I may love my country but part of that is about saying ‘guys you really need to sort this out’ not just blindly accepting all the faults without a murmur.

        Really it depends on your personal interpretation of what Jerusalem is.
        -In a geographical sense it’s impossible
        -Jerusalem as a metaphor for a centre for religious fervour and zeal is undesirable imo
        -Jerusalem as a metaphor for a some sort of utopia is fine but then it does include a lot of violent imagery which would seem to preclude that.

        tbh it’s fairly clear what was intended and I want no part of it.

    2. good tune though ain’t it

      1. Spanner1960 20 May 2011, 9:32pm

        Absolutely! Sir Hubert Parry’s finest.
        Personally, I like Keith Emerson’s version, but it’s not to everyone’s taste:

        1. Spanner1960 20 May 2011, 9:33pm

          w*w*w.youtube.com/watch?v=CN11bI1_sZo

        2. dave wainwright 21 May 2011, 7:15pm

          just LOVE those BOOTS mmmmmmm :)

        3. Galadriel1010 23 May 2011, 7:29pm

          I love Emerson normally, but that one’s not one of my favourites. Not up to Fanfare standards

          Definitely a very, very good tune, though

    3. If understand correctly from my memories of primary school assemblies, the hymn puts forward the theory that Jesus may or may not have visited Glastonbury UK on some sort of ancient Gap Year, as all trainee carpenters living in poverty in Judea tended to at the time. I’m thinking it’s a pretty safe bet he didn’t.
      As to whether this can be sang at straight weddings, I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t stop you, given some of the rubbish tunes people are allowed at weddings, so I’m not quite seeing an issue here unless it’s something incredibly tenuously linked to LGBT equality.
      My instinct on hearing this tune is to think I’m at primary school again so why anyone would actually request it at their wedding is beyond me.

    4. Dave Carlsson 23 May 2011, 8:23pm

      as you are a homo, I dont suppose you believe that aids was sent by God to decimate the queer population of the world?

      1. No I dont, and not because I’m gay but because it represents a fallacy about God.

  4. Carl Rogers 20 May 2011, 3:21pm

    What a ridiculous thing for Chris Bryant to get exercised about – makes him look like a prize politically correct idiot!

  5. What an idiot! Wasting time over some stupid hymn and wanting a religious component in civil marriage. Just what we need when we’re fighting for full marriage equality. Keep religion separate from civil please, don’t make matters wrose, Bryant and concentrate on making marriage for gays a reality instead.

  6. What a ridiculous human being Chris Bryant is.

    He claims to be ‘fighting for the rights of straight couples’.

    What on earth for?

    It is gay couples (not straight couples) who are denied the right to enter the legal contract of civil marriage because they are gay.

    Yet Bryant refuses to condemn this apartheid.

    He truly is a very stupid, irrelevant hasbeen.

    If he had any brain cells he would realise that opening civil marriage to same sex couples and CP’s to opposite sex couples, would solve all these problems.

    The attempt to allow CP’s to be performed in churches is a diversionary homophobic tactic (supported by those lowlifes at Stonewall). It is completely useless and unncessary.

    Labour (under Ed Miliband are clearly not interested in LGBT equality.

    We must remember this, for the next election.

    1. de Villiers 20 May 2011, 9:56pm

      > The attempt to allow CP’s to be performed in churches is a diversionary homophobic tactic

      I thought this particular comment should be repeated.

      1. de Villiers 20 May 2011, 9:57pm

        > The attempt to allow CP’s to be performed in churches is a diversionary homophobic tactic
        .
        I thought this particular comment should be repeated.

    2. Spanner1960 21 May 2011, 6:42pm

      Secular marriage for gays is all we need. Religious gay marriages are really up to the Church to decide; but who the hell wants straight CP’s? Nobody want’s CP’s at all. They are equally “useless and unncessary” as you put it.

      One size fits all. Married is married.

      1. de Villiers 23 May 2011, 6:16pm

        In France, many straight couples enter into a PACS. It may be that such an option should be open to all.

      2. I like CP because it lacks the religious overtones of marriage. I’d like to see a civil partnership system being the only legal form of official partnership recognition in the UK with couples allowed to hold a subsequent religious ceremony if desired (as is done in countres all over the world)

  7. Jock S. Trap 20 May 2011, 3:50pm

    Yes he’s an idiot.
    Surely there are better things to be fighting for not over some bloody religions take on some hymn.
    I would have said it makes him look like a prize turnip but somehow I know they be an insult… to the turnip.

    1. I think there are better uses for Parliamentary time than a debate about a hymn.

      Besides, WHO banned it and WHEN? If it was used at the Royal wedding a few weeks ago, then it doesn’t seem very banned to me.

  8. Chris Bryant is the idiot who campaigned for Civil Partnership Apartheid ceremonies to be held at Westminster.

    He was super-excited about that ‘successs’.

    Yet his silence about the fact that same sex couples are denied access to civil marriage remained deafening (if civil marriage was equal then Bryant wouldn’t have needed to waste his own time and the taxpayer’s money on allowing apartheid ceremonies to be held at Westminster.

    Chris Bryant doesn’t strike me as being particularly intelligent.

  9. Martin Lawrence 20 May 2011, 4:09pm

    It’s very easy to talk intelligently to a couple about Jerusalem (I write as a C of E priest). Just tell them that it’s a socialist poem, the first verse of which consists of a series of questions to which the answer is ‘No’, set to music by an aristocrat born in Bournemouth. Ideal for a socialist pouf like me. If I could only find the ideal man to go with it. Boo hoo.

  10. Yes, get yourself some publicityfor LGBT causes , Chris!

  11. dave wainwright 20 May 2011, 4:14pm

    Hasn’t he got better things to be doing ? for Christ’s sake is this what he is being paid so well for ? I am sure there are more things that this man could be doing with his time like addressing gay bullying in schools which is actually costing lives , EDUCATION EDUCATION EDUCATION

  12. David, agreed. We must also remember if the Tories fail to enact same-sex civil marriage before the next election. It will cost them dearly if they don’t and judging from the election last year, they’re only in power because of the Liberal Democrats helping to forrm the coalition. They hardly had a mandate to govern without them with a hung parliament. They’d better shape up or ship out in 2015.

  13. This is the man who said of civil partnerships, during the 2004 debates,:

    “I do not want same-sex relationships to ape marriage in any sense—several people have used the offensive phrase—because they are different. Although the two share similar elements, they do not have to be identical, so the legal provisions should be distinct.”

    So he doesn’t think same sex relationships are the same as opposite sex relationships YET thinks it unfair opposite sex relationships don’t get something the legally different civil partnerships give to same sex ones?? I’m so Mr Bryant, you are a total idiot.

    By all means fight for equal rights for all, but this special pleading only shows his complete lack of vision (with regards to marriage equality) and of leadership.

    1. Spanner1960 21 May 2011, 6:50pm

      This is ridiculous!
      It’s like all str8’s being given houses and gays only being allowed to live in tents. Now all of a sudden, the str8’s are piping up “We want tents as well!”

      CPs were only ever a halfway house because the government were too frightened to give us full-on marriage, for fear of the Church’s reprisals. CPs should be be totally obliterated and everyone with one upgraded to a full marriage. End of.

  14. Ok some people need to think a little before they comment. He hwas arguing for heterosexual civil partnerships. It is true that civil partnerships are discriminatory towards heterosexuals. Part of the battle for gay equality will be allowing gay marriage and heterosexual civil partnerships. Also the comment was made in the context of commenting on the absurdity of current marriage laws.

    Plus jerusalem is a very good and inspirational poem, I dont believe in god and i think that.

    1. Hi Scott,

      Whilst I’m sure (alright maybe I’m not, you never know with Bryant) he supports heterosexual civil partnerships, that is absolutely not what he was arguing for here. He was arguing explicitly for an amendment to heterosexual civil marriage (and also possibly religious marriage although that is less clear both in what he says and how he’d implement it).

  15. David Sharp 20 May 2011, 6:11pm

    This is so pathetic. Is there nothing more pressing that can occupy the minds of the clergy? To have to have this discussed in the house is equally pathetic.

  16. johnny33308 20 May 2011, 6:56pm

    How is this even an issue? Anyone can sing anything they wish at any time they wish, even at their own weddings. Would anyone stop them from doing this, ever? I think not, it is THEIR wedding after all, no one else’s. This is pure stupidity. What a waste of time and energy on a non-issue. Really!

  17. i think everyone here has it about right. What on earth does he think he is doing wasting time on this silly manufactured issue.
    I do note he has a Welsh constituency so He should not necessarily be to concerned about OUR – England’s green and pleasant land. What more can I say? Silly arse

  18. This idiot is completely clueless to equality issues if he thinks raising some drivel about a hymn is relevant. Actually i can’t think of any gay mp with any integrity.

    1. Stephen Gilbert doesn’t seem to be doing all that badly. He raises marriage equality every opportunity he gets. But I think he’s in very lonely company among a bunch of partisans and lightweights.

  19. de Villiers 20 May 2011, 10:00pm

    I am sure this was no more than a light-hearted comment. I would hope that we can all make comments now and then without having to speak with the utmost seriousness and solemnity.

  20. Another gay-idiot.

    1. Jock S. Trap 21 May 2011, 9:15am

      You’d know!

    2. Well, it has nothing to do with you, Rich. Nobody, male or female is ever going to marry you, even when you reach the age of consent.

      1. Spanner1960 21 May 2011, 6:53pm

        Oh I don’t know, Chris Bryant might.

        1. Yeah right 22 May 2011, 6:31am

          no i don’t thinkeven he’s that desperate!

  21. HairyGnome 21 May 2011, 9:43am

    When will our oppression ever end?

  22. Jock S. Trap 21 May 2011, 11:07am

    If anyone finds Chris Bryants ‘pair’ could they please hand them into lost property.
    He may have left them on the train, or something.

  23. WTF is the guy going on about?

    1. I’d like to think that he was saying that the proposed change to have civil CPs registered in churches was a sham and a total waste of time. A piece of legislation that the lib dem and tories are saying is the next big legal advancement for gays in the UK when in fact only around 1 person (if that) will actually bother with it. Removing the discrimination for straights to allow them hymns at their registry office is pointless, if they want that they can either have a religious marriage or rush to the nearest church and sing a hymn. What’s the difference, we go into a seperate room to register our civil CP within the church and walk outside the room and sing a hymn. The only difference is how far you’re bothered to walk The whole change is pointless and should be dropped in favour of marriage equality. No religious gay person will want to do a civil CP registered in a church , the point was they wanted a religious cermony where the CP was an integral part of it..

  24. There will never be any religious elements to a CP (look at what is proposed). It is a SECUALR registering of a CP that will be held in a part of the church. We didn’t get what was initially touted, CPs with religious elements. CPs are not religious (nothing in the proposed change makes them religious) only marriges can be religious .. The proposed change doesn’t change the status quo. Gays can’t get married either civilly or religiously. What on earth is he talking about. It’s gays that are discriminated against by the Church…full stop…that’s where the argument is, marriage equaiity (civilly and religiously)……CPs for straights is simply something that has to be don becuase we’ve got lumped with gay ones.

  25. I think you’re all off beam here – the hymn i’s all abut sex & that’s why the vicars ban it :
    – bring me my bow of burning gold = cock
    – bring me my arrows of desire = sperm
    – bring me my spear = erect phallus
    – oh clouds unfold = legs apart
    – bring me my chariot of fire = sexual intercourse/orgasm
    – built Jerusalem = attained paradise on earth through love

    Very appropriate for a wedding & no doubt why the Royals chose it

    1. Taken in that context, if your “bow of gold” is burning it would probably be wise to check into your local GUM clinic and give “Jerusalem” a miss until the problem clears up.

    2. soapbubblequeen 22 May 2011, 8:57pm

      Perfect Benji! And per my link below, there are lots of queer interpretations of Blake’s poetry and painting.

  26. No wonder that the animal lovers among us are struggling to get the laws on animal cruelty improved and tightened when those in a position to do something about it get involved in such a ridiculous argument. Everyone is an individual and no one, and that includes politicians and the clergy, has a right to dictate over ever silly thing like this which harms no one. Get a grip chaps and put your mouth and energy where it will do far more good. Examine our pathetic legal system and step up the punishment for child/animal abusers, chuck out immigrants who refuse to live according to our rules and not try to impose theirs on this their adopted country, and on and on, there are a lot more important issues.

  27. I really don’t understand why a straight couple would want a religious element in a civil marriage ceremony. Why don’t they find a religion that will marry them, there are plenty of denominations they can find even for those who have been married before or who have been divorced.

    Having a religious component for CPs is absurd. As I stated before, once we get civil marriage equality for gays, they too can find a denomination such as the United Church of Christ, The Quakers, the Unitarian church to marry them and for Jewish gays, the reformed Jewish denomination. Leave civil partnerships and civil marriages as they are and Bryant should stop wasting precious time advocating for them. It is unnecessary.

  28. soapbubblequeen 22 May 2011, 8:51pm

    Very amusing, considering that several literary and cultural scholars have found significant evidence to suggest that Blake’s poetry is full of androgyny and queerness:

    http://www.palgrave.com/products/title.aspx?PID=308079

    1. Given that most of his paintings are homoerotic watercolours of buff young naked men in biblical and allegorical settings it wouldn’t surprise me one bit.

  29. I’m 99.9% sure this politician was being sarcastic, and showing how ridiculous the “equal but separate” institution is.

    It enfuiates me that there are gay people defending the idea that marriage is for opposite sex couples only. Fine, if they don’t want a “marriage” that’s great. But some of us gays don’t feel it is equal, and surely everyone should be able to conduct their personal lives as they wish, so long as no harm comes of it.

    1. Chris Bryant was not being sarcastic,

      He has spoken repeatedly in the past about how same sex couples should be satisfied with 2nd class status when it comes to marriage equality.

      The man is an ignorant fool if he thinks we’re going to be fooled by these absurd diversionary tactics (allowing CP’s in church etc).

      Civil marriage equality is the goal. Nothing else will suffice.

      Chris Bryant is a huge embarrassment to the gay community and to the Labour Party.

      His idiocy shines through every time he opens his mouth.

  30. burningworm 26 May 2011, 1:59pm

    He isn’t speaking about all of christiandom but a very specific branch. Its a song. The notion that this is a fight or even a fight worth pursuing suggests that a gay tag of, i’m fighting discrimation for the heteros as a gay man should incur a chalice or altar of appreciation. Or maybe it is a way to say once again, nothing at all.

  31. burningworm 26 May 2011, 2:03pm

    Maybe the MP should work wih the friends of William Blake society and help fund an appropriate memorial structure. Or use his clout to push it along, its been stagnating for decades.

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

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all