Great news. Cameron needs to hold his nerve and stay the course
I don’t think Callmedave’s nerve has faltered for one second on this issue. Like Obama, he’s read the situation absolutely right and is now just facilitating the necessary politics to make it happen. He knows that by making it happen the history books will record his role in this great cultural revolution and that people will never again be able to write-off the Tories as anachronistic (as we currently can with great justification). I bet he cringes as much as we do when the likes of Nadine Dorries kicks off on one.
It is an excellent piece of legislation for the Tories to be implementing. It has public support, it will help them tap into a historically hostile voting group, and the opposition won’t want to be seen to vote against it.
Win, win, win
And it will weaken the Tories by pissing off the homophobic majority of their party who will bolt in greater numbers than will be attracted to them, leaving Labour and the Liberal Democrats as the ruling parties.
Win, win, win, WIN!
Don’t forget the removing criminal records for consensual sex and putting political pressure on countries that discriminate against gays.
Pol – I think your comments about Cameron are spot on. I fear that the likes of the awful Dorries will use gay marriage as a rallying point.
I think it will pass, but I think that Cameron has a fight on his hands, and I agree with you that he is seeing the bigger picture
I would do more than cringe if Nadine kicked one off in my presence.
Cameron is the first Tory leader to (almost) win an election in over 20 years, and even his halo is slipping. The right wing of his party are on a suicide mission if they think his social liberalism is a reason to ditch him.
Wish the headline of the story had been framed more positively though
This is quite a negative sort of site.
Sometimes but often very positive and progressive.
Not often enough.
Greta news, but it’s not really news at all. Polls have been saying the same thing for a good while – the interesting bit is wondering how many more times polls will show the same result before those arguing against equality finally admit defeat and shut up.
Government is not necessarily about doing what is popular, we don’t have direct democracy. It is a matter of doing what is right.
Marriage equality is right for LGBT people (whether you do or don’t is down to individual discretion, the key is having the choice).. Marriage equality has NO effect on anyone else.
The wrong thing at this stage is to drag out the process, expose LGBT people to unnecessary animus and waste so much bloody time. Get on with it, get it done, move on.
Good news to some extent, but don’t be surprised if the consultation reveals more were against it than those supporting it given the dismal result of the C4EM petition. I hope I’m proved wrong. I agree that the process is being dragged out. It’s enabling the opposition to have its voice heard, a far louder voice too and getting the attention in the media. Miliband, Cameron and Clegg need to pull out the stops and vocalise louder than the opposition. I dont’ understand their reticence.
I believe you will be proved wrong, Robert
I sincerely hope so, Stu, I really do. I get so disheartened being subjected to all the hateful rhetoric coming from the opposition on a daily basis. Nobody in support appears to be vocalising as loud as they do.
Fair play to you, Robert
I think there is a significant proportion of people who are speaking out loudly in our favour.
We tend as humans to remember the negatives when we are passionate about something.
There are many many examples of how the UK (and more widely) things are very much strong and positive for equal marriage.
It will happen.
Stu, you’ve made me feel a bit better about it, thank you. I admire your confidence and I only hope mine reaches a similar level with every passing day and the numbers in support continue to grow.
Your welcome, Robert.
One thing I am truly alongside you on is that we need to be determined in raising the profile of the equality campaign.
Out4Marriage is a great set of steps in the right direction and I am sure there will be more.
It would be good to see discussion on This Morning, The One Show, Question Time, Loose Women, Newsround, Daybreak etc etc as well as commentary in the LES, Guardian, Independent, Times and LGBT media.
Stu, yes, I concur with you. There needs to be a far larger profile for the campaign, no question about it. In addition to those in the media who support us, I’d like to see supportive MPs counter the opposition, rebuff them outright and persistently and hopefully, drown them out.
The consultation clearly states that it’s not interested in the amount of replies but more about what the content of the reply. I sincerely hope the govt keeps to this line. It would be pointless to base the consultaiton on the number of replies. The consutlation doesn’t even ask the person’s name , address etc so just basing it on the number of replies would be suspect. Anybody as far as I can see, made up or real, can answer this consultation, seveal times over.
There’s a perfectly good English word, animosity. I wish Americans would use it instead of animus.
Marriage equality will have an effect on others. In European law there is no distinction between civil and religious marriage. The government is in no position to offer an opt out for the church which means that it will have to comply with the law or dissent. One of its main sacraments will be declared illegal. On the point of animus. I know hundreds of Christians and have never heard a homophobic comment not least because in our congregation there are gay people, some have children, work colleagues and friends who are Gay. One of our local churches has a Gay vicar. There is no animus just a theological position. Article 9 of the European convention of human rights ensures a right to freedom of religious expression,conscience and practice
Yet again the grotesque lies of the RC church and the Christian Institute seep through.
No church will be forced to perform any marriage it does not wish to – in the same way it is not forced to marry a heterosexual couple it theologically does not agree to.
Graham you’ve demonstrated yourself that your main point is wrong. Article 9 protects the right of churches to opt out of doing same-sex marriages. So does UK equality law, which specifically says that churches and their staff do not breach discrimination law if they turn away same-sex couples from their religious activities for reasons of the church’s religious doctrine.
“In European law there is no distinction between civil and religious marriage”
Wrong. Religious institutions simple hold a licence to conduct marriages. They are still civil in nature.
“Article 9 of the European convention of human rights ensures a right to freedom of religious expression,conscience and practice”
Freedom of expression is not the right to superimpose ones beliefs on another by way of prejudice. Its a common mistake made by the religious, but logic and civil liberties are not strong points with them.
Only 39% of Tories polled support it? That’s not a high number at all. What does that say about a vote in Parliament if that number remains the same up until the election? If it’s going to be defeated, it will be them.
Even if 39% of Tory MPs voted against it they could not defeat it.
Tories do not have a majority and there are only a very small minority of other party MPs who are opposed.
This story is a positive story – yet the headline and discussion seems otherwise!
Politically, 39% of Tories is very high number and can cause a lot of trouble.
That is too large a number to be ignored or dismissed, for the real treat to equal rights they are.
The thing is, this whole event was never an issue until the church made it one.
Most people really don’t care either way, because it simply doesn’t affect them.
However: The whole thing has shifted, and now it has become a potential election issue, then people are rapidly starting to take sides, and viewing this as a minor bit of legislation that could explode and cost them their seats. This is turning into the Tory version of Blair’s Foxhunting escapade, and it could cost them dearly if it backfires.
Much that I personally support the same-sex marriage bill, I would fully understand if they backed out of it, as it has become politically a rather tenuous position to be in.
I would not understand, forgive or ever vote for a party that had promised so much in terms of equality and civil rights and then backed down in the face of organised grotesque bigotry and religious interference in politics, democracy and childrens education.
I do not believe they will back down. It would cost them too much to do so.
Personally, I’m not sure.
I really hope not, but like I said, there is a bigger picture to look at and if push comes to shove, I suspect they would rather look like prats backing down, than end up losing an election over what is, to most people, a trivial little issue.
51% of people in the UK believe they should continue with the policy – suggests it is not a trivial little issue to “most” people.
I’m not talking about “most” people.I’m talking about the hardcore, middle-England blue-rinse Tories.
61% of Tories now want to drop it.
I was quoting you when you said most people …
The road to equality is always blocked by obstacles. If you think they’re going to cave, make the effort and lobby them yourself not to. Let them know how important this actually is to those of us it directly affects. In the meantime we have the support of the majority of the British people. Make sure that point is mentioned to the politicians again and again.
The church never raised this issue because it has held a consistent position on marriage for many hundreds of years. What we are seeing is a change in society aimed at a type of equality for same sex couples. The Church has had to defend a traditional position. I think the government should have had an open consultation as to whether we should or not. As it is the decision has already been made ,its really now about how its done
“The Church has had to defend a traditional position”
This is a stupid assertion. There is no such ting as “traditional marriage”, its simply a legal civil contract that has existed in many forms that’s been hijacked by the churches as their domain.
“Traditional” also includes slavery, a position supported by the same churches.
If equal marriage is not implemented by the time of the next General Election- I predict that it will be THE issue of the campaign- and portray the conservatives as yet again – the NASTY party. Those anti-gay conservative MP’s cannot keep their mouths shut over the issue!
They still are the Nasty party, with the exception of the PM.
There are a few other notable exceptions that are not nasty … but predominantly I fear they remain the nasty party.
That 51% now will most likely grow upwards by the time Parliament gets to vote. Encouraging.
I’d be happier with a 65% right now!
Yes – most of us would.
But this is not about winning percentages – its about winning over minds.
Yes, very true.
I really do think these polls are about as much use as a chocolate teapot and can so easily be manipulated by the poll takers.
What if a lot of those asking the questions were either gay, gay sympathetic, etc then surely that would skew the results
They don’t even have to be gay but either Tory or LibDems, who wish to perpetrate the myth for the good of the and stability of the government.
I really don’t think the Tories and their lap dog LibDems are going to enact this bill while the vile murderer Thatcher is this side of the gates of hell. I know Karma has caught up with her and she is now just a dribbling pathetic old crone, but she, we shouldn’t forget she was behind the horrendous Clause 28 and even tho she was out of government by then, was the reason so many Law and Justice Tories voted to keep it when it came up for abolishment. I am suspicious as to why CallmeDave even broached the subject while she’s still alive and think it was just an extremely cynical move on his part..
I profoundly disagree, Paddyswurds
It is very much in the Tories interests to ensure that equal marriage occurs.
Why does PN highlight the negative? The majority don’t think the propsals should be dropped! Leave it to the Christian Institute to give the negative spin.
Only 51% Slightly disappointing, what effect on people does a non religious marriage have. Seriously.
Well at least 1 in 2 have our backs…
Those results are pretty much the same as the ComRes survey for C4M found.
if 51% think yes, why do you headline 35% think no?
Well, it’s good most Britons support equal marriage!
To the 35%- it’s none of your business. Same sex marriage doesn’t affect you. There’s nothing wrong with it. Civil partnerships are unequal and will not do.
To the 14%- pick the right side (our side!) ;P
I honestly think that it shouldn’t matter what the polls say- we should be guaranteed marriage. We should just move on with it and legalize same sex marriage!
“We should just move on with it and legalize same sex marriage!”
Not big on democracy, are you? (Or do you not understand it) No surprise, from a bigot like you – you generally like the “do what I say” fascist approach.
Once again this article and my comments have nothing to do with transgenderism. You need to stop being so obsessive about it!
You’re right. I never mentioned transgenderism. My comment is related to the gross stupidity and ignorance of your comment.
You should stop being so obsessive, you’re a bigot, get used to it.
It is going to happen. And just as the night is darkest just before dawn, the enemies of justice and equality always scream loudest when they sense their inexorable approach.
Can anyone tell me what this so called consultation entails, where it is being held and who are the inquisitors and how many or who has been consulted yet. Is it a coven of blue haired WI ladies somewhere in the home counties, is it self appointed jurists in town halls up and down the country, who is consulted, Anglican Vicars, RC priests out on parole from their prison sentence for paedophilia of the nations children, retired and bewildered judges or defrocked and retired bishops sitting somewhere in a quiet corner of Cornwall. Where exactly, we would all like to know so we can give evidence and show that we are also human beings and deserve our rights without a FU*K*NG CONSULTATION!!!!
Its an online consultation which has been widely publicised on Pink News and elsewhere, I am sure you have heard of it!
Oh I have heard of it but have yet to see a link.Care to post it if you can?
I posted it in answer to your question on another story and it was included in the main text of that story.
That’s not a consultation, it is a request for information.
I think what Paddy is asking, is precisely who is going to collate all this, and afterwards, who will preside over that information and come up with a decision?
Well, if you read the consultation document on the Home Office website it explains that.
I completely agree that there is no need to consult on marriage equality. Would any government consult if it were black people who weren’t allowed to get married, or people who practiced a specific religion who couldn’t marry one another? We all know the answer, so why not just get on with legislating when it comes to gay equality?
I agree a consultation was unnecessary.
I do not see it as a barrier to equal marriage though.
You’re right, Stu, a consultation doesn’t mean it won’t happen, it does draw the matter out for longer, though, and gives pessimists like me more reason to worry! If you believe in a cause then why discuss it? Surely you’d simply act on it as soon as you could.
I really sympathise and wish the govt had shown more balls and just gone for it – but some people are born worriers ;-)
It’s gonna happen
I really do hope you have a large pinch of salt and a good sharp knife and fork Stu, ’cause I do think you will be eating your words…..
I really do not – this is going to happen. I am certain of it.
Stu for Prime Minister! I do think you’re probably right, but I can’t quite bring myself to believe it with the same confidence you have, not until we know for sure.
What’s wrong with blue hair? :/
Who said there was?
Sounded like you meant it in a negative way. Sorry!
Get religion out of government!
I agree, Rick. Get rid of it and while we’re at it abolish the House of Lords, unnecessary, anachronistic, unrepresentative and undemocratic. It’s really quite awful when you think that a body of unelected people get to say who can and cannot have rights. At least it would get rid of religious clerics in government once and for all and diminish their power.
The Lords acts as a safety valve to prevent large majorities of the Commoins railroading through ridiculous legislation.
Most parliaments have an upper and lower house of some description for that very reason. The principle has worked for hundreds of years, and just because the democratic process doesn’t happen to swing in your direction in this particular instance is no reason to disband a perfectly working, well-proven political and democratic model.
This is true – they should not have the Lords Spiritual though.
Or the Inherited ones.
The House of Lords a democratic model, an unelected body? Ours is the only parliamentary democracy whose upper chamber isn’t elected. You’re the prat!
Er, not true.
Canada has appointed senators, for example.
Italy has a mix of elected and appointed – though the majority are elected.
The Irish senate has quite a mixture of individuals – including some appointed – and a lack of universal suffrage for the elected ones.
And so on.
We must keep religion in government.Removing Bishops from the house of lords or separating church from state may actually be beneficial for the Christian pressure groups wanting to help tackle quite deep seated social problems in the U.K. and material poverty abroad
Britain nor any democracy should be a theocracy – church and state MUST be separate
“Christian pressure groups wanting to help tackle quite deep seated social problems in the U.K. and material poverty abroad”
Are you talking about the ones who molest children and cover it up?
This entire consultation nonsense asks how to introduce equal marriage. Hasn’t Lynne Featherstone looked at the CP consultation? If a CP is so ‘equal’ to marriage, surely all this needs is to just legislate immediately since almost all of the groundwork has been covered by CPs with the exception of pensions? All that needs to be done is to re-codify marriage in the 1973 Matrimonial Causes Act to state…’civil marriage shall be gender neutral’. Why is that so hard to do I wonder?
Its going to happen
Its just the extremists trying to agitate you – and they are succeeding.
Don’t let them win.
Nebraska Jane Svoboda
She has much in common with the idiot Stu(pid’s). Both paranoid.
I wish the idiot would stop taking my name (and slanderously manipulating it) in vain.
I am nothing like Jane Svoboda nor am I paranoid, whereas Keith …. well I think thats perfectlyt clear to any dispassionate observer!
Take your meds. Haven’t you heard, polygamous and incestuous relationships are banned in the UK, illega and always will be?. If you believe the majority of Parliament would support repeal, then you clearly are more than delusional. Your obsession with polygamy and incest suggests you believe in it as well as reveals something about you. You’re the deviant apparently.
Calm down it’s just a straw man fallacy.
NURSE! He’s fallen out of bed again!
I don’t think thats why he needs hospitalizing though lol
I’m afraid that things happen so slowly. From start of the consultation to legislation took about 2 years for Civil Partnerships – with the religious wingnuts all saysing exactly the same thing they’re saying now, polygamy, chair legs, marrying your dog, destruction of society, the end of marriage as we know it, anarchy in the streets …. yada yada yada.
HOWEVER. The very thought that it will take perhaps another 3-4 years to be able to stand there and say “I do” is a VERY depressing thought. Any suggestion it should be delayed is likely to have my size 12 boot against their backside, especially when I remember those Tories who wanted a debate on fox-hunting — which the whole country is against.
@Keith if you feel that strongly, why not start a religion to campaign for whatever it is you’re after ?
Standard straw man fallacy.
Logically it’s total religious freedom that could lead to polygamy, since it only occurs in one religious group. One more reason to keep laws secularly based.
I agree. So what. Bugger off.
Could someone start a spoof of the fundamentalist group Christian Concern, maybe called Christian Fear?
Possible articles on things to do in these doomsday End Times: demonise gays, right to wear jewellery, have conferences on demonising gays, what to wear on the final day…
Sounds like a good plan ….
It certainly has legs
Recently attended a Christian concern conference,but heard no demonising of gays though.
Must have been one of the rare ones where they were not focussed on demonising LGBT people.
Maybe Andrea Minchiello Williams wasnt at that one!
“Recently attended a Christian concern conference,but heard no demonising of gays though.”
You should probably try to listen more then. Try a newspaper or two.
There is another problem.
If Scotland legalises it first. Some businesses could be more inclined to set up there understanding that to attract talent from ALL groups of people, it might not be possible if they base themselves in England + Wales.
If you get married in Scotland and then are offered a job in Exeter, would you and your married partner go? I mean, the moment you cross the boarder you won’t be married any longer. That “could” screw up how you fill in forms, tax returns, how you apply for household insurance, mortgages, etc.
What if it only gets legalised in Scotland and not in the rest of the UK ?!!! Or the other way around might make Scotland a pariah, with gay people leaving en-mass to the rest of the UK.
The poll does reveal that the proposals should not be dropped. But did that poll do only England + Wales, or did it include Scotland ?
I honestly believe that if one part of the UK legalislates for marriage equality, the rest of the UK will have to follow within a few years at most. If the Scot Gov decide in June to proceed, then it’s going to be Scotland who actually passes the legislation first. It will also put pressure on Cameron & Co to also do it. The question is will the SNP government decide next month to proceed with it? I really hope so.
It would appear that the poll did cover Scotland – the article says “Support [for proceeding in equal marriage] was generally higher among women and respondents based in London and Scotland.”
I’m always pleasantly surprised at how many people in Scotland are in favour of equal marriage, according to these types of polls.
Maybe that says more about me, though, and my lack of faith in my fellow Scots!