Rights of minorities of course should not be decided by votes or opinion polls.
However its clear from this poll that 64% of people are not against equal marriage and recognise equality and fairness and key principles in UK culture.
In other polls recently 61% of Christians in the UK supported equal rights for LGBT people and 70% of non-Christians.
The atmosphere and response to the issue discussed in BBC Question Time in Guildford this week all evidenced there were few people who realistically opposed equal rights for LGBT people.
Civil marriage is a matter for the government and government have a duty to preserve and ensure the rights of minority groups. A fact responsible and reasonable people in the UK endorse.
Equal marriage will happen and the antiquated views of some which endorse treating LGBT people as subhuman by treating them with inferior rights will become a matter of history. We’ll look back in a few years and laugh that anyone thought it reasonable to debate it.
Get off your soap box. The polls show that the majority of people support gay marriage, you old windbag.
Stu is right. We can not presume equal marriage will happen until its law. So continuing to say why it should and oppose the church, dodgy polls etc is important. A soap box is needed and if you don’t support it then one has to question what side of the argument you are on.
So, I guess you do not want equal marriage then, Nancy – if you think talking about it and supporting it is a bad thing?
Rude and obnoxious tart!
The link talking about the Catholic Voices/Comres poll is broken. The correct link is http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2012/03/09/analysis-did-the-catholic-voices-poll-show-a-britain-opposed-to-gay-marriage-not-really/
please consider amending the title of this article to say more gay couples. using ‘gays’ alone isn’t right as so many people use it the way you have in a perforative sense…
I dunno. As with anything, offence is about context. One could argue that the more we use the term “gays” in a neutral or positive context, the less power it has in the hands of those who wish to use it in a derogatory way.
In general, I think you may have a better point, but in headlines I think sometimes brevity has to take a higher priority than when you’re writing prose.
Better still, what’s wrong with “same-sex marriage”?
She is typing American English ,as she is an American .
Sorry I don’t know why I’m assuming Sam is a Female .
I’m a female
As the Telegraph article rightly says:
“If gay marriage is a just cause, then it is just whether or not most voters think it so. True statesmanship does not wait upon referendal permission. A government enacts civilising measures because they are the right thing to do, not because they are mentioned frequently in focus groups.”
“Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, has called the proposals “cultural vandalism”. Yet precisely the opposite is true. The extension of marriage to include gay couples will entrench the idea of the married estate as a social good as well as a private condition. Marriage encourages reliance upon a spouse rather than the state: a wedding is the ritual in which the individual recognises publicly that he or she is not alone, and that, choosing a spouse, promises love to, and accepts lifelong responsibility for, that person.
This week, Cameron will visit a country in which such issues are the stuff of ferocious public battles.”
“it is to his credit that he is taking the risk at all – not only removing an inequity, but strengthening the social fabric. In the spirit of Chesterton’s maxim, he grasps that the true defender of marriage dares not leave it alone.”
Has PN had a leaked copy of LF’s statement on the consultation and how come the independant is reporting on it?
“…Lynne Featherstone, the Liberal Democrat Equalities Minister, will launch a formal 12-week consultation process next week. The Government will not include legislation in the Queen’s Speech in May, saying that would pre-empt the consultation. But the decision will disappoint gay rights groups. Ministers are expected to confirm in the autumn that the law will be changed before the next general election due in 2015……”
etc etc ….
“A grass roots campaign to introduce same sex marriage is here”
Signed and passed on …
But surely a grass roots campaign involves seeing your own MP, writing to them and wrting to all the members in the HoL. Writing comments /discussions in local papers etc…Rallies etc
It’s more than just signing petitions and ticking a box in a poll. It didn’t even know this paper was doing a poll and I’m really interested in “gay” marriage.
Personally I think we should have a symbolic mass burning of our CP certificates outside Parliament and a call for “gay” marriage now not simply a vague promise for “gay” marriage for some date prior to 2015!
I personally believe that religions/religious figures and buildings should not be required to perform marriages, whether it’s because the couple both has the same gender or they have tattoos, whatever
I think using the terms “gays” isn’t very LGB friendly. You don’t go around calling people “straights”
That other poll was definitely biased lol
I definitely see the UK legalize same sex marriage and having equal LGB rights before the US. I’m from the US, and I want to move out of the country- if the UK did those things, England would be one of my choices of places to move to
er, “legalising” – we speak English here. ;)
Well I speak American English. Z is a cool letter, come on haha :P
…but this is .co.uk. If you want to speak in your pidgin bastardised version, please do it on American sites.
Sorry to harp on, but we invented the bloody language. ;)
Check out the Oxford English Dictionary – you might get a surprise. It prefers -ize for most words…
Oh the joy………………
Can’t believe it , Bair taking on the pope!
That puts a spanner in by spokes about him coming to deal with the Catholics and the CofE during CP legislation …
I’ve been writing to that Roman Catholic Baroness Shrley Williams about her supporting “gay” marriage. I still can’t forgive her for putting forward that amendment for an opt out for catholic adoption and old peoples homes in the equality legislation and I’d luv a statement from her supporting gay marriage!
It’s a dilemma. I’m normally against whatever Tony Blair is in favour of, on principle. I guess he has to get a few things right though, just at random.
Has anyone seen this?
The barmy desperate attempts of the RC church that will fail or the BBC reporting?
Interesting that the anti same sex marriage Telegraph says that public opinion is split on the issue. If the results of the survey were reversed I bet they would have said public opinion was clearly anti same sex marriage.
Here is info on a similar poll in the Sunday Times:
Amazing! I never would have thought Tony Blair would support same-sex marriage after having converted to catholicism. Well done, he surely has evolved. Let’s hope more catholics do the same as well as CoE clergy.
Tony Blair (Labour) and Edwina Currie (Conservative) were the MPs to sponsor the first Bill to equalise the age of consent. Why Blair would then “come out” as a catholic I don’t know. And why the catholic church would like another mass-murderer on their books, I also don’t know.
I still have my response from Edwina, thanking her for working so tirelessly for gay rights. At least she doesn’t have the blood of thousands of Iraqis on her hands.
Interesting that, looking at the full YouGov/Sunday Times poll results, support for same-sex marriage is strongest in Scotland (52%), followed by London (46%) and then the rest of England and Wales. The debate in Scotland has been going on longer, so perhaps this is an indication that when people hear both sides, they choose equality!
Full poll results (see page 7):
What a bigoted, backward, primitive country we live in that a poll could only confer 43-45% support for marriage equality. I expect even that percentage will drop further in the coming years, considering the grotesque multiple number of offspring, fundamentalists are keenly procreating to further their agenda.
I suspect the experience of Belgium, Spain and Argentina is much more likely where the percentage of people supporting equal marriage grew as they saw the rhetoric about equal marriage used by the RC church (and a few minor others) was false. I see no reason to suspect the opposite will occur in the UK.
You forgot the homophobic rhetoric used by the head of the CofE. I only hope your prediction is true, but 45% support is abysmal and quite distressing that such a large percentage of the british population should wish to curtail civil/human rights of others and support an apartheid based on sexual orientation.
True, the head of the CofE is a relevant personality in the UK. Although obviously they would not have been relevant in Argentina and Spain!
I am very disappointed by the 45% figure in the surveys today. Although I do remember that a couple of weeks ago a similar poll had the figure at 70% and 61% amongst those professing to be Christians. This may be a blip in surveys, or due to the methodology used.
I hope I am not being too optimistic.
The United Kingdom has become the laughing stock of the entire civilised world because of the bronze age machinations of the fools leading the Catholic and established CofE churches Williams, Nichols and O’Brien should be hanging their ancient heads in shame. All they have for all their bluster is ridicule and derision and serves them right. It is high time these dinosaurs in pointy hats and frocks were dragged kicking and screaming into the twenty first century……
I don’t think its fair to say the UK is a laughing stock because of the Cardinal and the Archbishops.
Sure, they have made laughing stocks of themselves and they bring shame on themselves.
The response from many prominent politicians, most of the media and the majority of the public is to oppose them.
I see no reason why the UK should be laughed at. The Pope has recently tried the same tactic in the US, as have US RC clerics and fundamentalist evangelicals. Similar campaigns have happened in Brazil, Australia, Germany, Italy, Canada and indeed in Ireland.
People from outside the UK (from the foreign media I have looked at) are laughing at the clerics and the extremists but admiring the government and the UK for their determination to secure equal marriage, fairness and transparency against the rhetoric and vindictiveness of the church based opposition.
Absolutely. I think the British religious establishment has managed to make complete ass’s of themselves, whilst the rest of the world looks toward our government and their attitudes towards human rights and equality.
The church is using that old left-wing fall-back of accusing people of wrongdoing and attempting to shame the populace into submission, much like anybody that mentioned the appalling immigration policies of the last government was immediately branded a racist in the hope it might shut them up. Well it seems in this particular case that ploy has failed dismally and most people have seen through their feeble defence and recognised these people for the homophobes they really are.
Absolutely the UK population has seen through the vindictiveness and ignorance of the church leaders and their sanctimonious campaign.
I see no reason for the world to be laughing at the UK because of the actions of the relics that are religious leaders. Here for example is the coverage of the Brisbane Times which has comments from religious organisations, Peter Tatchell and others supportive of equal marriage. Its a balanced report of the varied opinions and if there is any laughter its against the Archbishops not the UK (http://news.brisbanetimes.com.au/breaking-news-world/uk-catholics-campaign-against-gay-marriage-20120312-1ut4a.html?)
I do wonder if Paddyswurds was having a dig at the UK.
Now, what does the Irish church hierarchy have to say on equal marriage?
“Rights of minorities of course should not be decided by votes or opinion polls.”
I agree; this is the Tyranny of the Majority as popularised by Mill and Tocqueville, but this is not about rights or equality; it’s about re-defining marriage, changing it from the union of a man and woman, to the union of two people regardless of gender. Should those who have already entered into such an institution or plan to, as it’s currently defined, have no say? Don’t get me wrong; I’m not necessarily against same sex marriage, but neither the church or the state has the mandate to decide without first consulting the general public.
So are you saying that human rights and protection of minorities should be decided by a referendum?
Would you do the same to decide whether you would protect people from racism etc?
Nevertheless, in a democracy the leaders should still at least listen to the people and take their standpoint into consideration.
Mind you, some thing supported by public referendums would walk it: capital punishment, corporal punishment, hard labour in prisons, back to teaching the 3 ‘R’s, bring back matron in hospitals, cap MP’s pay and expenses, sack all the tube drivers, deport failed asylum seekers etc etc… You got to admit, maybe they have a point in some cases…
I could be forgiven for thinking you were setting up a straw man here. This issue is not about human rights nor the protection of minorities. A right is something that no one can lawfully prevent you from doing. No one is preventing you from getting married. This is about whether or not marriage should be re-defined to accomodate same-sex unions.
The UN Declaration of Humans Rights specifically states that men and women have the right to marry – (not necessarily men to women).
Humans have a right to equal status under the law.
As a gay man I do not have equal status under the law in terms of state recognition or opportunities for state recognition of any relationship that I have with a man I love and want to spend the rest of my life with.
You may not think those are rights. The law, many philosophers and most of the population would disagree with you.
I wasn’t trying to straw-man at all. I was merely pointing out that a majority vote in a referendum may well be democratic, but it doesn’t necessarily make it right.
And actually, as you mention it, someone *IS* preventing me from getting married. A marriage in it’s most basic sense is the joining of two people in the eyes of the law and the people, and currently the closest we have to that is a CP, except it is not called “marriage” and not recognised by many. Until I can fully state I am married, then anything else is simply a fudged compromise.
The straw man comment was aimed at Stu. To be honest I can empathise with both sides of the whole issue. I don’t mean I support the stance of the church as I’m an athiest, but there are many people who would like marriage to remain the way it is: union of man and woman – offspring etc.
So, Jake has correctly explained that the UN declaration of human rights states that every human has a right to equal status under the law. Marriage is a legal contract endorsed and licensed by the state. Do you (Brad) therefore accept that equal marriage is very much a matter of rights?
You can marry. No one is stopping you. Marriage as it’s currently defined is the union of a man and a woman.
They won’t let cyclists use the footpaths. Are cyclists being denied their rights? No. Is it one rule for pedestrians and another for cyclists? No. Can cyclists campaign to have footpaths changed to accomodate cyclists? Yes. The issue therefore, is whether or not footpaths should be changed to accomodate cyclists, not ‘are cyclists being denied their rights?’.
Why would you not want me to be able to marry the man I love?
My inability to marry the man I love means my relationship does not give my relationship equal status under the law.
My rights are not preserved in English law.
These abysmal figures certainly put into better perspective the recent survey that found that 61 per cent of people who identify as Christians back equal rights for gay couples:-
Know thy enemy indeed!
According to ComRes, the UKs leading market research industry, 70% of Brits oppose gay marriage
No – that poll was commissioned by Catholic Voice and used the most biased question imaginable. You can equally well interpret the result as that 70% think divorce should be banned. The poll question didn’t even mention same sex marriage!
Try looking at the Scottish Social Attitudes Survey 2010 results to see a properly designed unbiased question about same sex marriage. 61% agreed it should be allowed.
According to an Ipsos/MORI poll within the last few weeks “61% of Christians in the UK, agreed that gays should have the same rights in all aspects of their lives as straight people”.
The Ipsos/MORI poll has been shown to have had a fairer methodology and questions that were not as leading or loaded.
Nevertheless, it would be good if they stated their sample count and locations.
You know the old cliché about lies, damn lies and statistics…
You are a prize idiot. Name one right that a heterosexual has that a homosexual does not. Just one!
A heterosexual can marry someone they love and have the right of the law recognising their relationship is a marriage ceremony.
A gay person is unable to exercise that right.
You might not see that. Plenty of politicians, philosophers, the Bishop of Salisbury, the Bishop of Bath & Wells, the UN Secretary General and many more certainly do.
I believe you have it wrong. Partly because you are a troll and seek to ensure segregation and apartheid remains.
Not to mention differences in rights of immigration between married couples and civil partners, differences in pension entitlements between civil partners and married couples. I could go on.
“ComRes surveyed 544 UK Christians on Cpanel between 25th and 31st October 2011 by online questionnaire.”
“Results of a poll released today say 61% of people in the UK who identify as Christian back fully equal rights for gay couples. The 2011 Ipsos MORI study explored the “beliefs, knowledge and attitudes” of people who identified as Christian after the nationwide census last year.
74% of respondents said as Christians they thought religion should not have a special influence on public life. The survey was conducted on behalf of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science.
Six in ten respondents, 61%, agreed that gays should have the same rights in all aspects of their lives as straight people. Only 29% said they disapproved of sexual relationships between gays. Nearly half said they did not actively disapprove.”
I want to offer a rather off-topic comment. I apologise if it offends anyone – it’s not the intention. Homosexuality to me has two contrasting sides to it; on one hand there is the ‘respectable’ side i.e. I have met gay people who I find to be very affable, reasonable, educated, witty people, moreso in fact than your average person, and it’s easy to identify with them and enjoy their company. They are attracted to the same sex but otherwise no different to their heterosexual friends. On the other hand, there’s the overly-sexual, attention seeking type, the type who seems to feed off controversy and the gay cause, who gives homosexuality a bad image. Some people say that the Labour party have no real interest in putting an end to poverty because then there’d be no use for Labour. I get the impression that some gay people have no interest in actually achieving the aims they supposedly fight for, otherwise they’d just be gay, with no battle to wage their life would lack meaning.
I presume you are not gay yourself then?
I seek equality, why shouldn’t I?
If people hadnt campaigned to secure the vote for women or prevent apartheid in South Africa would it have happened? Were the people who sought such rights not affable themselves?
Believe me, I want equality – I want to be able to marry the man I love.
When it happens I will be so happy. I will be so proud of this country.
I have met many heterosexuals who are affable, friendly, people you might enjoy passing the time with. Intelligent, articulate and genuine people. I have also met others who give heterosexuals a bad name by looking down their noses at gay people and judging them on their orientation (nothing else just who they are sexually attracted to). Of course, not all heterosexuals are like that …
almost 33 thousand pro gays have signed the c4em petition, whereas 240 thousand have signed the http://c4m.org.uk/ petition.
240000 vs 33000, its clear people are AGAINST same-sex marriage. We already have equal marriage, that’s right, its between men and women.
This is silly folks.. the polls here quoted show majority opposition to gay marriage not support! If we exclude the ComREs and the Stonewall polls as both could be assuced of biassed questioning, we are left with the polls mentioned in this article.
YOuGov poll shows 47% opposition to gay marriage, including many opposed to CP’s too! Oly 43% supportingg gay marriage.. thats a majority agaainsst gay marriage.. sorry that’s not opinion that’s mathematical fact.
The ICM poll found similar figures, though they’re not published in this article.. how curious!.. so on what grounds can this article claim majority support? Sorry.. and this is not a comment for or against gay marriage, it’s just againt very bad mathematics