Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

MP who warned of ‘polygamy and child marriage’ defends anti-marriage equality view

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Paula Thomas 26 Apr 2012, 12:21pm

    This guy is either misundderstanding the argument or he is deliberately misrepresenting it. Perhaps he will enlighten us as to whch on it is. (not holding breath here you understand)

    1. Sadly, I think probably the latter!!! I wish someone would challenge him to justify his statement …… and if and when he can’t then expose him for the idiot I suspect he really is.
      We just don’t seem to get a decent calibre of MP nowadays!!

    2. This is the anti gay Christians black propaganda against gays to make them look bad. It is lies. It is the Chrstian Mormons who practice polgamy not gays. It is the Muslims who practice child marriage. Not LGBT people. The anti gay Christians are taught to use propaganda to try and destroy the LGBT movement. They use lies that can be diproven. Spread the truth when you can, expose the haters when you see them.

  2. Robert in S. Kensington 26 Apr 2012, 12:40pm

    It’s truly amazing that this idiot is ranting about religious marriage. Hasn’t he read the consultation strategy? This is about CIVIL marriage, nothing more, the two are entirely different. I’m amazed nobody in his party has pointed this out to him.

    1. Puff the magic drag on. 26 Apr 2012, 1:37pm

      He has read it, he understands it perfectly well. What he is about is the promulgation of the stated public policy of the proponents of the Manhattan Declaration. It is a deliberate and sustained distortion of the facts to cause misinformation in the public arena, the ultimate objective is to prejudice the cause of LGBT equality. He is, like his fellow “committed christians” ie, fundamentalists dishonest, mendacious and determined to stop the movement to equality for LGBT using means anything they can.

  3. “While I am aware that a number of people disagree with me, it is clear from BOTH my POSTBAG and the COALITION 4 MARRIAGE PETITION available at c4m.org.uk , which over 460,00 people have now signed, that a significant body of opinion in our city and up-and-down our country share my views.”

    1. 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.

      Six in ten respondents, 61%, agreed that gays should have the same rights in all aspects of their lives as straight people includi9ng civil marriage.

      Only 29% said they disapproved of sexual relationships between gays.

      Out of the Christians polled in 2011, 57% said state-funded schools should teach knowledge about the world’s faiths without any bias towards Christianity. They also believed the school should not try to promote belief.

      Only 10% said they would draw on religious teaching to make a moral decision compared with 54% who would act according to their own “inner” moral sense.

      Given this authoritative survey it seems likely that issues such as underage people, fake signatures and oversea signatories are likely on

      1. the C4M petition.

        A petition is not the way a responsible democracy decides of human rights – which the majority of Christians seem to agree with in this survey.

        They also support equal rights for LGBT people.

        Now a majority of US people also agree with LGBT rights being equal as reported this week!

      2. Robert in S. Kensington 26 Apr 2012, 2:10pm

        And for a petition with only 460,000 signatures out of a population of 60 million people doesn’t really mean a thing does it? Very poor turnout. Now, if there were at least 10 million, they might be taken seriously. Not going to happen. Petitions mean nothing since they can’t be scrutinised and their methodology remain secret. Comres.com has refused to provide information about that at the request of C4M. I think that speaks for itself.

        1. What would then say about the C4EM petition with less than 50,000 votes in a population of 60 million people and where London alone has around 350,000 LGBT voters.

          Based on your argument, do you then agree that the C4EM and the entire idea of gay marriage should not be taken seriously since less than 50,000 people have signed it and it would only affect less than 1% of the population?

          1. And yet the British government is bring in marriage equality….. wow. How did that happen?

            ….that must really piss you off?

            Oh, yes, you’re here, aren’t you, so yes, it obviously does.

            LOL. Oh, you do make me laugh Ken, its like watching a child fall over – you shouldn’t laugh, but its just too funny not to.

          2. Whether the C4M is 460k signatories can be seriously doubted. GIven the underhand tactics they have been using and also trying to get children to sign it I would hope the Govt. throws it out. Also, their website has had nowhere near that amount of hits!

            I would urge PinkNews to try to get the data on how many hits the C4M website has had

      3. Did you read the bit about his post bag being filled with letters against gay marriage?
        Are you aware that most MPs only acknowlegded letters from confirmed constituents?
        Are you also aware that many other MPs have express similar views about their constituents being against gay marriage and some have written letters to the responsible ministers to seek reassurances on the ever increasing concerns raised by their constituents?
        Are you aware that the militant gay marriage lobby have been proven to be experts in manipulating opinion polls?
        Are you aware that in America, EVERY referendum on gay marriage has always been in favour of those opposed to it even though some opinion polls released prior to the referendum predicted otherwise?

        Finally, if you believe the opinion poll you have cited to be genuine, would you support a call for a referendum on whether the UK should legalise gay marriage?

        1. So what.

          All you bluster isn’t making a dent on the UK position is it?

          You’re pathetic Ken, you really are. A old desperate fool who got a £200 laptop and thinks he’s a crusader – LOL!

          1. Robert in S. Kensington 26 Apr 2012, 3:31pm

            He’s an American troll, what can one expect? Don’t enable him by responding to his nonsense. The man is clearly sick and demented.

          2. I don’t care what nationality he is to be fair, he’s an irrelevant troll – who has chosen which side of history he is on. The wrong side, the losing side, the side of humiliation.

    2. 460,000? Is that all?

      Sheesh, that’s a bad day’s attendance at ONE city’s Pride march….

      LOL, losers are in short supply, eh Ken? Do tell us more of your economic theories though, I need a laugh at work…. (do you know what work is?)

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 26 Apr 2012, 2:13pm

        Exactly, and only 0.007% of 60 million people,far less than 1%, ha ha. Pathetic!

        1. That means you agree that since the entire gay population is less than 1% of UK population, they should not be taken seriously. Afterall, their number is insignificant!

          1. Er, no it doesn’t, you silly old fool. How desperate are you to make a point, is it that rare for you to be right?

            We’re at least 6%. By British Government estimations. And that number is irrelevant, as we’re winning the hearts and minds of moderate straight people and its being helped by the fact religion is a dwindling influence.

            Win-Win for us. You’re a dying breed, Ken, time to get over that fact.

      2. Robert in S. Kensington 26 Apr 2012, 2:48pm

        Will, do not engage the fool. Don’t dignify any of his rants with an answer. I’m reporting all of his offensive comments to Pink News. He’ll come back of course under a different disguise but he’s so transparent, it will be easy to decipher the idiot.

        1. Oh, I know I shouldn’t. But laughing at Ken is such cheap fun. I mean the man is a desperate old fool, and its wrong to laugh at someone’s mental health issues, but its soooooo much fun.

          1. Ken's achilles heel 26 Apr 2012, 7:20pm

            It is cheap and shameful – but I like it

  4. So if I read what this guy is saying, then he has no problem with civil marriages of same sex couples?

    Why can he then not support the governments proposals?

  5. ““The Labour Party in Lincoln have now stated that they believe there should be gay religious marriages and that anyone who does not hold that similar view to them is an extremist.”

    Well done. You get it! That’s what full equality would mean. If you oppose equality then you ARE an extremist, and worse, an irrational bigot.

    There must be no arbitrary exemptions from equality law. Least of all on the grounds that you believe in a homophobic magic sky-tyrant.

  6. His postbag is no doubt filled with people who, like him, can’t tell the difference between civil marriage and religious marriage. Bless the poor little chap, he must seriously believe that no-one out there will be able to notice the flaw in his argument.

  7. A thinly veiled excuse for homophobia without a doubt. Plus this is an attack on religious freedom for Quakers & co.

  8. if it looks like a pig and oinks like a pig then it must be Karl McCartney

  9. -”I strongly feel that society is made stronger by people’s commitment to one another and when we make vows to each other” I agree
    -“I also support the commitment and love between individuals, regardless of their sex or gender, and feel that it should be encouraged, supported and celebrated.” I agree
    -”I believe civil partnerships do this.”
    No they don’t; it’s a separate name, marriage has 1000+ legal benefits, partners are not husbands/wives- it’s separate and unequal
    -“I do, however, firmly believe that no institution should be forced to perform a ‘same-sex marriage’ against the will of that institution, whether it be a religious one or otherwise” I agree
    -“Marriage, in my belief, is widely seen as a religious union and I will always support my long-held Christian and mainstream views on this matter.”
    It’s not. Marriage was around before Christianity. Marriage is not owned by any religion. If couples of other faiths besides Christianity can get married, so can same sex couples.

    1. For the fourth one, I only agree about the religious institutions.
      Non religious institutions should be required to perform same sex marriages.

    2. He also seems to be forgetting only a hundred and fifty of years ago, marriage was not for love, it was basically a transaction between two families with the wife becoming the property of her husband.

      The definition of marriage constantly evolves.

  10. johnny.33308 26 Apr 2012, 4:07pm

    Wow! I note with sadness and surprise that your politicians in the UK seem about as bright as ours here in the US! It seems no “conservatives” will ever understand the difference between words like CIVIL and RELIGIOUS since politicians on both sides of the pond seem to somehow confuse those words with each other all of the time! They will NEVER get it and so we must punish them at every opportunity, since they seem to be impossible to educate to any reasonable degree…..I have seen many dogs with far more intelligence than most all “conservative” politicians (our Republican or more accurately, our American Taliban party)….seems you have a similar problem….I extend my sympathies…….perhaps it is time for all of us to eliminate ‘conservative’ politicians from our political processes, permanently? Just an idea………

  11. “A religious marriage is one between an individual man and individual woman”
    Christian/Islamic/etc religious marriage, yes, but the majority of us want CIVIL marriage and shouldn’t be denied that

    I’m tired of religious people- keep your damn nose out of my business! Same sex marriages do NOT affect heterosexual marriages, religious marriages.

  12. “Marriage, in my belief, is widely seen as a religious union and I will always support my long-held Christian and mainstream views on this matter.”

    So, in other words if you get married in a non religious ceremony in his eyes you are not married, I guess that would be applied to straight marriages as well?

    The man is such a contradiction of himself!

  13. And what is the response of those pathetic self-hating losers in the LGBTory groups about this neo-fascist bigot scum Tory MP?

    Their silence is deafening.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 26 Apr 2012, 5:16pm

      Quite! And why haven’t Tory MPs come forward to support us I wonder? Ditto for Labour. Where are those openly gay tory MPs, the ones their party claim have more gay MPs than the others? It seems as if they’ve succombed to the Ben Bradshaw syndrome. Utterly appalling and cowardly.

  14. He seems quite literally not to know what the blue blazes he is talking about. Get him onto every radio phone-in and telly talk-show. He will do wonders for marriage equality.

  15. Robert in S. Kensington 26 Apr 2012, 5:22pm

    If he supports CPs as he claims he does and considers them equal to marriage, why haven’t any heterosexuals demanded them, for those not wanting to marry? Someone ought to ask him if CPs had been available to everyone would he have considered it and if not why not, all things being equal? I can just imagine his response. He’d probably oppose heterosexuals wanting them which would really put him in a bind because it would really prove they’re not equal just by his resistance to them for himself and every other heterosexual.

  16. Just laughable! There’s a very real danger that he will bring Parliament and his party into complete and utter contempt.

  17. Last week I wrote to Karl McCartney (MP) asking for an appointment at his next surgery to discuss my concerns about his recent comments in respect of marriage equality, how the LGB community have exhausted the cause of equal rights and his willingness to dismiss his constituents views and vote based on his own beliefs therefore belying his commitment to represent those who elected him. I received the following letter “appointments are reserved for constituents who need to see me in person” and “I do not feel it neccssary to discuss the allegations you make with you in person, I am willing to write to you and address any concerns you have”. It seems I am not even worthy of an appointment at his surgery.

    1. Disgusting and a dereliction of his duty.

  18. But the proposals don’t stop him and his fellow christians believing that marriage is between a man and woman and is religious.

    This is about gay couples getting married in a civil ceremony and possibly in a liberal religious org.

    You can have both, you know. It’s not one or the other.

    He’s a bad MP becuase he doesn’t represent his party, support his leader and more importantly he is insulting and unrepresentative of his constituents.

  19. “I do, however, firmly believe that no institution should be forced to perform a ‘same-sex marriage’ against the will of that institution, whether it be a religious one or otherwise.”

    What is he getting at here? Is he trying to widen the anti-argument by suggesting that there are some non-religious “institutions” that might not want to perform same sex unions? Is he going to suggest that each council should be able to vote on whether its registrars office is to perform same sex marriages?

    I can imagine every backwoods Tory shire council having a field day with that one.

  20. Can none of these people not read? The proposal clearly states, no church or religious institution will be forced to marry any couple they do not want to, just like they already can!

    But then I guess can we really expect it from people who cannot even read and follow their own religious book!

  21. There are over a hundred polygamous Mormon sects in Utah where tens of thousands of women and children are stripped of their human rights – sexually, physically, and emotionally abused. The question must be answered: How will a Mormon president protect the rights of women and children in the U.S.?

  22. Legalising cannabis will turn everyone into a heroin addict right?

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