Reader comments · Exclusive: David Cameron ‘not backing down on gay marriage’ · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Exclusive: David Cameron ‘not backing down on gay marriage’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Quite right too, he needs to show people that he does have a set of balls!

    1. Yes, I wish they would get a move on and introduce civil marriage equality asap, stop dragging this thing out as it only gives the anti-gay hate mongers further opportunity to spread their pack of lies and distorted misinformation .

  2. Brilliant, thanks for this PN. :)

  3. Jonathan Wright 6 May 2012, 11:49am

    So a huge swing to a party with even greater history of supporting gay rights is proof that people don’t like the fact that the Tories are supporting gay rights and therefore they must back down and return to their old hating ways…

    Defiantly sounds like the standard logic of the Daily Mail, et. al.

    1. Paddyswurds 6 May 2012, 1:10pm

      Not just the Daily Wail, but the broadcasters as well. It was mentioned several times on the early morning news on the Beeb, but one suspects the info was gleaned from the papers which were being discussed at the same time.

      1. Sky were also quite negative last night

        However (I dont usually read this trash but it was in the crew room at work) 61% of those polled by The People are in favour of equal marriage.

    2. Not just that but there was no anticipated breakthrough for hate-mongering UKIP while the BNP lost ALL its seats. Also pro-marraige equality Boris Johnson won in London. I don’t think this election had very much to say about marriage equality at all which suggests that, for the most part, the British electorate are comfortable with it.

  4. According to one comment in Lynne Featherstone’s blog today George Osborne says that equal marriage won’t be in the Queen’s speech

    and see this one from Nadine Dorries

    “Gay marriage is a policy which has been pursued by the metro elite gay activists and needs to be put into the same bin. ”

    I really hope that DC hasn’t changed his mind but the media news is not good! I’m beginning to realise how grateful we all are the we did have Labour for 13 yrs.

    1. theotherone 6 May 2012, 12:01pm

      labour who refused point blank to bring in queer marriage? labour who funded countries fighting gay rights in europe? labour who fought the ban on queers in the military for years? labour who removed employment protection for trans people in their equality act? labour who legitimised gay bullying in the workplace? labour who legitimised bullying of gender variance in schools? labour who wouldn’t touch the blood ban? labour who brought in a law allowing religious schools to teach that homosexuality is evil?

      1. Labour were certainly not unalloyed gold but their long period in government was necessary to produce any modfication in the Tories, Gerald Howarth is a timely reminder of what the Thatcherites were like

      2. Hodge Podge 6 May 2012, 3:19pm

        This didn’t deserve -11 thumbs

    2. Nadine Dorries still stirring up anti-gay propaganda, misinformation, and distorting of facts to suit her nasty Christian extremist agenda, she should have been binned many moons ago, .

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 2:21pm

        Probably a friend of Melanie Phillips.

    3. Why doesn’t Nadine Dorries feck off and join UKIP? she’d mbe right at home with all the other fruitcakes there.

  5. Dr Robin Guthrie 6 May 2012, 11:53am

    Nadine Dorres is having a field day ALL over the press today, screaming the “Drop Gay Marriage” nonsense.

    And as usual, the Smellygraph and Sunday Wail commentators are lapping it up like the swill it is.

    What part of “Everybody voted for Labour and Labour Support Gay Marriage” do these thick idiots not understand,

  6. The consultation doesn’t even finish until after the Queen’s Speech. Are people stupid or just spinning? Of course it wasn’t going to be in the Queen’s Speech!

    If it was going to be, it would’ve made the consultation completely pointless and thus played into hands of those bigotted crazies who think it’s all a conspiracy anyway.

    1. The consultation is about HOW not whether…they’ve already said they are going to do it…so why shouldn’t it be in the Queen’s speech?

      1. 1. Because of the above playing into the bigot’s hands. I’m not even happy it went to a consultation but as it has we may as well play along. There is, after all, a question in there asking IF it should go ahead.

        2) Because it’d be a sign of extremely poor Government to ask how it’s going to be done and assume an answer will be found before one is.

        If it ends up being in the Queen’s Speech, YAY! I’ll be the first to celebrate. But I don’t expect it to be in there. Given this keeps getting postponed, it’s hardly surprising.

      2. @Benji

        To have legislation in the Queens Speech – the government have to know HOW they intend to introduce it and the HOW question is still being asked in the consultation.

        1. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 4:41pm

          I think the HOW to introduce it question will be the same way in which CPs were. I would imagine the wording of the first draft for legislation would be more or less identical to the CP bill but merely reinforcing the ban on religious denominations having to recognise or officiate since this is a purely civil issue. I dont see any difficulty to implement it, most of the groundwork has already been done with the CP law.

          1. I tend to agree, Robert – in addition consideration for learning any lessons from the CP process that I might be unaware of.

            However, the government (whether for the right reasons or not) launched this consultation. Personally, I didn’t see the consultation as desireable but I do understand that the government felt a need to be seen to be transparent.

            Unless the consultation provides something crucial and critical that no one in the UK (or the other nations that have introduced equal marriage in) to consider – hugely unlikely! – then introducing the legislation is unlikely to be difficult in terms of drafting the law.

    2. The consultation IS pointless

      If Cameron is dedicated to equal marriage then why consult? with all three parties supposedly supporting it, why is there any difficulty at all

      And if it is on “how” to implement it (and really, how is it this hard? What is there to ask?) then going ahead with a dedication to it isn’t a problem

      1. Maybe so, but its happening and we have to follow the process.

        It gives ignorant people like Dorries something to shriek about when there is nothing in the Queens Speech but it doesnt change the governments plans that equal marriage will be introduced.

    3. This business about secrecy about what is in and out of the Queen’s Speech is a load of nonsense. Anyone who’s anyone knows what’s in and what’s out. I was told Equal Marriage was out over two weeks ago. The link with election results is very tenuous.

  7. If Tory backbenchers think the “large swing to Labour in the recent cuncil elections” was because of gay marriage I’m a Dutchman (which i am not).

    They’re just taking the opportunity of Cameron being on the back foot to knee him in the groin.

    If he does back down and the party swings to the right they’ll be consigned to electoral oblivion for another generation. He’s trying to stop them looking like the nasty party while his backbenchers are doing their best to retain that image.

  8. We are about to see that its the same old homophobic Tories. There will be no gay marriage in England by the next election. Remember that when you next vote.

    1. Paddyswurds 6 May 2012, 3:20pm

      I don’t agree. Cameron is not about to let the UK become as in thrall to the xtian fundies as the US which is being destroyed by this sort of thing and which is stopping capable people be involved in politics so that they end up with people like George W Bush, Sarah Palin, Christine O’Donnell and Mit Romney, a moron, i mean mormon and so on.

  9. bobbleobble 6 May 2012, 12:29pm

    The Tories are insane if they think that they made losses in the locals because of Cameron’s support for gay marriage. They lost support for a host of differentreasons but they don’t want to consider that awful possibility so they’ve got to find a scapegoat. And as usual gay people are convenient. The sad thing for us is that Cameron will probably listen to his backbenchers, drop gay marriage and then carry on with the policies that are the real reason they lost votes.

    1. Agreed. The poor state of the economy is what lost the Tories the tmost votes but there were other issues. I expect the Tory failure to control immigration properly despite saying before the election they would do so (usual Tory practice of lying about this subject) also lost them quite a few. Gay marriage was probably way down the list (probably last)

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 3:23pm

      He’s not going to back down. If he does, then it will be a Labour government in 2015. I woudn’t want to be a Tory backbencher in opposition if that scenario were to play out. WIth the majority in the Labour and Liberal Democratic parties and a few Tories supporting it, I don’t think they’d be able to stomach the wrath it would inflict on them and being blamed for the party’s failure. Blaming it on equal marriage is a red herring. The hate-mongers and fear-peddlers know it’s coming, that’s why they’re so vocal.

  10. @Aiden

    If he does stick to his word, will you stop you stop your nasty little deceits and go away ?

  11. I know it sas 15 comments but I can only see 1?

    LF’s blog has a comment from her saying

    “for the avoidance of doubt – same sex marriage was never going to be in this year’s Queen’s Speech.”

  12. What would Nick Clegg do if the fascists get their way and bend David Cameron’s arm to breaking point? We’re the only ones voting LibDem now, we’re trusting him to push this through. I hope Cleggie’s doing his maths here – as the country is now voting, he would be much better off in a LibLab coalition. With Labour pro-marriage equality, so would we. Bring on a general election, that’s what I say.

    1. Totally agree, I feel like I’ve been jettisoned back into the Thatcherite year’s overnight…

      Election please! The grass is growing a little bit too quickly for my liking..

    2. That There Other David 6 May 2012, 1:12pm

      The Fascists will not get their way. Nadine Dorries is still smarting over Cameron’s utter dismissal of her attempts to get more state funding for religious groups under the guise of anti-abortion counselling. The Papers are only loving it because they smell a story. Frustrated is most definitely the correct description for Ms. Dorries, followed of course according to tradition by laughter. She really is quite the fruitcake.

    3. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 3:25pm

      A LibLab coalition is quite a possibility if the Tories don’t support equal marriage. It would be their worst nightmare, a guaranteed defeat in 2015.

  13. Avalokiteshvara 6 May 2012, 12:56pm

    Action speaks louder than words.

  14. The problem is that David Cameron might support it, but his party doesn’t. Even many of his own cabinet have said they would vote against it.

    1. bobbleobble 6 May 2012, 1:04pm

      As far as I’m aware the only member of the cabinet that has appeared to be negative on the issue is the Chief Whip. Even IDS has come out in favour.

      The talk is that there may be up to 100 Tories voting against the measure if and when it comes to a vote. That leaves 207 who are expected to vote in favour. Add to that 50+ Lib Dems and around 2/3 of Labour’s 250 odd plus Plaid and Caroline Lucas and I think we’re over the line. The Lords is where the real fight will be and I suspect if this ever does come to a vote this time the Parliament Act will be required.

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 2:17pm

      Dream on, fool!

    3. John

      Name one cabinet minister other than the Chief Whip who has said they will vote against it.

      1. Seems John can’t name another cabinet minister.

        After all even IDS supports gay marriage

  15. It’s important for Cameron to show that he won’t be bullied into backing down by the anti-gay coalition of hate groups and their misleading petition against equality.

  16. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 1:03pm

    So when it eventually passes, what are you going to do about it? Kill yourself? Tell us all how this will affect you and your fellow morons? You’re delusional if you think Cameron is running scared. On the contrary, you and your ilk arerthe ones running scared. Why are you always trolling here anyway? Come out of the closet and live an honest life for a change.

  17. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 1:11pm

    Even if there were no consultation underway, are people really that stupid to think that the Tory party losses weren’t or won’t be attributed to its austerity measures? The party has been under fire long before Cameron even mentioned equal marriage in his speech last October. This is merely a red herring to shift the blame for the backlash against the party,how convenient and how obvious. The Tory party cannot win re-election if it loses gay voters. Just look at the last general election. Hardly a majority. Are those backbenchers prepared to see their party go down in flames over this one issue? I doubt it.

    1. “The Tory party cannot win re-election if it loses gay voters.”

      In fairness, I don’t think that the tories got too many gay voters last time round… I certainly didn’t vote for them and I can’t imagine any other gay people, especially those who know of their history, especially re: s.28, who would vote for them either. Our votes would have gone to Labour and the Lib Dems.

      The coalition is a one-time thing; the LD’s are going to struggle electorally for a good while now, after alienating their base by joining the tories and backing down on tuition fees.

      I said it at the time, the last election was a good one for Labour to lose. The tories are going to struggle after 4-5 years of austerity anyway, regardless of any “gay vote”.

  18. It makes me laugh how the tories might think the recent elections were lost due to DC’s position on gay marriage. Nothing to do with a failing economy, rising unemployment, tax increases, public service cuts…. etc.etc.etc.

  19. Draw a line for me please between local council elections and the national governments cross-party commitment to marriage equality. If he backs down now he sends three messages. He has no back bone, religious dogma has undue influence over policy and that the lgbt community are to blame for the loss of council seats.

  20. Aiden, you wear gay styled clothes, you have a gay haircut, you can’t stay away from gay sites, and you love the cock, how many times can you pretend to be hetero? Nobody is buying it here, we all know that you are a self-hating homosexual. Think about it every single posting you make we all know that it is entirely motivated because you are a closet gay. All of these so called spokespeople for the christian fundies that appear on this site have serious emotional issues all from repressing their need to be who they really are, and they like you are, gay. You are and will always be gay, nothing you do will change that.

  21. I’m with hugh – I would feel much more comfortable all round with a LIbLab coalition. That’s not possible in the current parliament because the maths don’t add up. I would happily wait for marriage equality – which it looks like we’re going to have to anyway – while the country repeats its call for a centre-left swing in a general election.

  22. Yeah, the government should focus on wrecking the economy, not on fixing anything. After all, people voted Labour because they support the government’s economic policy and opposed its policy on gay marriage. Seriously, what?!

  23. The Guardian is running a poll on whether gay marriage is a waste of time.

    1. Dr Robin Guthrie 6 May 2012, 2:44pm

      And so far the answer is NO.

      It is NOT a waste of time

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 3:31pm

      I’m surprised the Guardian would do that after declaring support for it earlier. Makes no sense. I wouldn’t pay too much attention to polls either. Not everybody reads the Guardian, or the Mail or Telegraph for that matter. Notice the majority of readers don’t think it’s a waste of time. As Lynne Featherstone said, the coalition can ‘multitask’.

    3. 75% of voters agree the government should continue to introduce equal marriage – come on guys add your vote to support equal marriage!

  24. Gay activist Paul Mitchell 6 May 2012, 1:48pm

    What does the Queen fear about gay marriage?

    Why is gay marriage not included in the Queens speech?

    The Queen sounds like a wrinkly old total bigoted old school ultra-conservative anti-gay bitch to me!

    Rule number one:
    A Queen should ALWAYS help another Queen out!

    1. Paul Mitchell – please keep your shocking ignorance of our constitutional monarchy to yourself. What sort of a man are you insulting an 85 year old lady in such a hideous fashion? Maybe you like to mug them too?

  25. LOL – And what did an organisation called Pink News expect a Downing Street spokesman to tell them? Ever heard of spin?

    As for the ‘gay marriage’ proposed legislation, I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were you. It won’t be in this Queen’s Speech and things may get so bad for the Con-Dem Government by next year that the Coalition will be splitting… So it may not even be in the 2013 Queen’s Speech. If the Govt is still in existence by 2014, then don’t expect anything then, as the Conservatives will not want this political hot potato on their hands just before the 2015 election.

    What ‘gay marriage’ advocates forget is that all those presently married will be affected by this legislation as it will change the meaning and purpose of their marriage – which many don’t see as a state seal of approval on a personal relationship but society’s confirmation of the importance of natural family life (as in procreation).

    This is why the C4M petition has gained 500,000 signatures.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 2:17pm

      Change the meaning and purpose of their marriage? Explain how? Is it going to stop heterosexuals from further marrying. Is it going to stop those already married from procreating? . FYI, civil marriage has NO religious component, has NO mandate to procreate. If that were the case, women beyond child bearing years would have to be banned from marriage, as well as those who choose not to or who can’t procreate. Obviously, you’re devolved brain hasn’t heard of invitro fertilization and surrogacy that many hetero and homosexual couples take advantage of too. You’re really stupid! And 500,000 signatures is barely 0.08% of the population. miniscule and irrelevant. You’d need at least 30 million to have an significant impact, half of the population of the UK. NOT going to happen, and I’m so sorry to disappoint you. Now run along you delusional fool.

      1. Dr Robin Guthrie 6 May 2012, 2:47pm

        What he means is.

        Gays are ICKY and we will somehow “spoil” there marriages.

        But they will never admit it.

        At the end of the day, these types just cannot deal with anything remotely different to themselves and should be pitied more than anything else.

        It’s called “Failing to Evolve”, whether socially or mentally.

    2. John

      I assume you were crossing your fingers or laughing when you made a comment suggesting spin and using C4M in the same sentence – particularly after their lack of transparency about their manipulation of Comres polling and downright bigotry.

    3. “This is why the C4M petition has gained 500,000 signatures.”

      LOL indeed – a petition full of children signatures extorted out of them by the catholic church.

      Lets see how you “LOL” after equal marriage is brought in, shall we?

  26. Gay activist Paul Mitchell 6 May 2012, 1:51pm

    David Cameron for UK King!

    David Cameron supports gay marriage, he should become King of the UK!

    The Queen is too bigoted and way too old anyway, she should just die already!

  27. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 1:53pm

    To prove the opposition wrong including all those bigots at the Daily Mail and Telegraph as well as Tory backbenchers, imagine the following scenario. The coalition government decide to abolish civil marriage and replace it with civil partnerships for those who don’t want or can’t have a religious marriage. Imagine the uproar from the bigots who claim that CPs are equal to marriage. The Daily Mail would be the first to condemn it and we all know why, don’t we?.

    1. I’d go a step further: simply replace all existing religious and civil marriages with civil partnerships.
      If couples want to have additional religious ceremonies, that should be up to them to agree with their sects; but it should have no legal significance.
      That way, civil partnerships would be open to mixed couples in the same way as they are open to same-sex ones.

  28. Paddyswurds 6 May 2012, 3:13pm

    Fortunately we here in Ireland and the UK are immune to the threats from the xtian right crazies…
    It is highly unlikely that David Cameron is going to allow himself to be cuckolded by these people. He, I am sure will stand firm on his commitment, as to do otherwise would render him lame duck to these people and he would find his premiership tainted for whatever time it has left … It simply won’t happen.

  29. I did not expect equal marriage to be in the Queens Speech this year (purely due to the consultation being incomplete).

    I am sure the likes of Nadine Dorries, McCartney and Howarth will spout forth that this is the government diluting their stance – the reality is that the plans were not to bring forward legislation until after the consultation and this has not changed.

  30. I tell you what didnt happen, Aiden – your predicted mass gains for UKIP or the BNP

    I tell you what will happen – proposals will come to parliament – probably in 2013/14 for equal marriage.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 4:45pm

      Absolutely, and they know it hence the fire and brimstone they keep trotting out. Words of desperate people who are on the losing side. Once it passes, we will all be able to laugh at them. They’ll have a lot of explaining to do as to why none of the events they predicted will ever come to fruition (polygamy, incest and bestiality).

  31. Looking forward to Queens Speech of 2013/14

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 4:51pm

      Hopefully, she won’t choke when she reads “equal civil marriage” out loud. I can almost hear the gasp of the backbenchers, lol!

  32. Cameron will come under huge pressure on this one — it is seen as a totem issue. It will be a test of his nerve. I suspect having made such an issue out of it, he must now carry it through or else the accusations of flip-flopping are going to get even worse.

    Opportunists like the truly odious Nadie Dorries will make as much hay as possible, but every time the Tory party has swung to the right it has been punished in the polls.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 4:56pm

      I really don’t think he’s under pressure on this one. The foes of equal marriage are just grand-standing to their bigoted constituents. It’s going to fire back on them eventually and I don’t think they’d relish a Tory defeat in 2015 over this one issue alone. If they do, then they’re even more delusional than I thought.

      1. My fear is that Gay Marriage will be used as a rallying cry for the backwoods Tories who frankly hate the idea. They will use it as a club with which to beat him.
        The problem for Cameron is that to ditch the policy would be impossible — he has invested far too much political capital in it. What was that line from Macbeth about being has hard to go back as to go on?

  33. The Most Exclusive Breaking News (date: as Always)

    The Tory’s anti-gay rhetoric is likely to increase, according to sources close to the Minister in Chief

    CallMeDave is reported to have demonstrated his “inability” to control his aides and allies. He stands accused of “willfully ignoring” the homophobic elements of his chosen circle of friends but vehemently denies that birds of a feather flock together.

    He is also reported to be planning a barbecue party and a retraction from earlier plans to legalise pink fishing. He is being accused of pink fishing to attract unaware pink fishes with baits. “That’s what baits are for”, he says. He recognises he could be “forced” to make other retractions in the future and concludes: “They (pink fish) took the bait”.

    1. A very thick cloud of homophobic smoke has been continuously coming out of CallMeDave’s arsseyard, but his aides deny any suggestion that fire and fried fish are related to the smoke. The homophobic cloud is fastly spreading in all directions.

      Other sources could not be reached to explain this phenomena, but sources closer to them have told us they “could not be bothered to pick up the phone” when told “Teh Gays are on the other side of the line”.

  34. It’s an opportunity for Cameron to attempt to look principled about something he doesn’t give a toss about. He will look sanctimonious but he won’t weep if it gets voted down. Plus he hopes it will keeps everybody’s mind off his disastrous financial policies.

  35. Craig Nelson 6 May 2012, 6:29pm

    Just as with Boris, we are being played.

  36. Interventions like this by Cameron, to offer olive branches to the right by losing something from his “liberal” toolbox, confirms a long held belief that the Tory party is held back, from being conservative, by a more “toxic” audience; indeed what has been called the party’s “toxic constituency”.
    In Feb 2011, from a sample of 1004 adults, 37% felt immigration was a very big problem, 37% believed it was a problem, 16% felt it was not a very big problem and 5% felt it was not a problem at all. Further, according to a YouGov poll studying the same period, 35% of those who voted Tory in 2010 appealed to family values over anything else, 41% voted for them on matters of traditional values (compared to 19% for Labour) and 28% on patriotism – while only 6% voted for the Tories appealing to tolerance and diversity (which Cameron sought to highlight).
    The Tory party – very much through fault of its own – is not conservative, but a big tent dominated by tubthumping angry old bastards.

    1. It’s hardly surprising that they don’t take too kindly to gay marriage. What does surprise is that Cameron doesn’t want to challenge them – even from a conservative position.
      But hold up! Should Cameron really be listening to the likes of Stewart Jackson MP, who pleaded with Mr Cameron to drop “barmy lib Dem policies” like gay marriage? As it has been noted, Conservatives were not wiped out by independents, the right, the far right, or the even fringier. They were routed by the Labour party.
      If rumour is true, the Conservatives held a policy review last night at 11.00pm (though that is probably untrue since the mayoral election result didn’t come through until before 12). Regardless of when they had or have it, the proposals when they do are set to see the right get more than just olive branches, but bunches of fukcing great bouquets. Bad move, Dave

  37. Lumi Bast 6 May 2012, 7:33pm

    While I live in the US thank you! I’m glad when someone supports marriage no matter where it is :)

  38. David Wainwright 6 May 2012, 7:52pm

    It would appear, as usual , that our votes are courted prior to an election and are immediately dispensible after the event.
    NEVER TRUST A TORY nor the propagandists and apologists and their media organs.

  39. He’s not backing down.
    Ok, here we go! He’s just about to back down.
    It’s all about as predictable as an english summer and little more than we can expect; obviously being a minority etc etc…

  40. PeterinSydney 7 May 2012, 10:34am

    Well done Mr Cameron. Don’t let the nasties divert you. And now the French will move to same-sex marriage rights as well with Mr Hollande. That should be a great impetus to places like Australia and USA to do the same.

  41. I honestly cannot understand folk who say that one issue cannot be debated because “the country has more important things to deal with”. It’s just a rediculous concept that we would have to drop an important issue because some people think that it’s less important than another.

    It’s called multi-tasking. Governments are expected to be able to deal with many issues at once; and they do – an average of 2685 bills are debated and enacted into Acts of Parliament each year.

    If I thought a government could only do one thing at a time, even if it supported full gay marriage, I would have to think carefully about whether I trust them to run our country.

  42. Why do gay people have to spout this tired old rubbish that anybody who opposes gay marriage must be a homophobe by definition. It’s just silly. Are gay people the only ones with principles now.

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.