Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Video: Home Secretary Theresa May comes @Out4Marriage to reaffirm Government’s equal marriage promise

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Thank You, Home Secretary.

    Thank you for your support and leadership.

    Thank you that you are continuing with your determination to ensure equality is achieved.

    Thank you that you have proved that the lies of certain right wingers that you were abandoning this policy – are that, lies and sophistry.

    Please act quickly when the consultation closes to collate the responses and deliver the governments proposals to parliament to ensure LGBT people are no longer treated as subhuman in England & Wales with regards marriage.

    1. Stu Sub human is an interesting phrase Most of the legal benefits in marriage are also available for civil partnerships. property rights, inheritance tax, social security and pension benefits, parental responsibility and maintenance,tenancy rights , life insurance , next of kin rights and dissolution similar to divorce. Same sex marriage would afford a ”sense” of equality for sure but i think sub human is a bit of an exaggeration.

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 24 May 2012, 2:35pm

        ‘Second-class I think would be more appropriate.

      2. It can be argued both ways, Graham

        Its not just about an appearance of equality – because where there is an appearance of inequality it causes those who are determined to undermine LGBT people to stick the knife in further.

        However, I will settle on second class.

        CPs are certainly not equality either in name, reality, international status or lots of technical issues.

        1. I dont think LGBT people are second class at all and i personally don’t know anybody that does think that In fact i would say there is stereotyping in the other direction. Gays (hence the word ) are more fun caring and sensitive than heterosexuals. I think we are in real danger of looking at Gay people as just blobs of sexuality rather than people who have other interesting aspects to their character. This battle is mainly over a definition of a word which will give a sense of equality / legitimacy which you hope will contribute to lowering prejudice. I hope that happens. It just seems to much to say that people who believe in a traditional view of marriage are seeking to undermine LGBT people ,are sticking the knife in, or are homophobic. I just don’t experience that at all. Marriage for some is more for something ,rather than being against something. Stu I would be interested to learn of the technical differences between marriage and civil partnerships

          1. I am just about to dive out for dinner, when I return (if someone has not addressed this before me) I shall go through the technical differences of CPs and marriage for you.

            Of course there are significantly more elements of any person whether straight, gay, bisexual or whatever than the sexual activity they may or may not participate in.

            My experience is that those who have strong feelings on marriage – in the sense that they wish to prevent gay people marrying usually have homophobia associated with it. Maybe that is not a common experience – although I know many other people have experienced that.

            If you change the word gay to black. An honourable person would never say they would wish to deny marriage to someone due to their race (the way someone was born). They would rightly be called racist. So, why is it wrong to say that a person saying they wish to deny someone who is gay (the way they were born) is homophobic?

            I am about to head out, will answer later.

          2. There are differences between civil partnerships and marriage.

            First – the name and the perception of the value of the relationship. Whilst some people regard a CP as a ‘gay marriage’, many others perceive a CP as having less value and being second class. There also is the issue of calling them something different which segregates LGBT couples from heterosexuals and appears to treat heterosexuals superiorly.

            Second – International Recognition. On the international front think of it this way: of course same-sex marriages won’t be recognised in many countries. But civil partnerships fail the criteria for an international standard (many countries with equal marriage won’t recognise civil partnerships!), whereas marriage equality would make things far clearer for travellers and emigrants to countries with equal marriage.

            Continued

          3. Third – Pensions – There are numerous differences in pension entitlements for CP couples compared to married couples. They are detailed here:
            http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/51685/response/128919/attach/html/2/3136.pdf.html

            Fourth – Separate but Equal – A couple of weeks ago my boyfriends boss was abused on the train home because he was gay. Being openly gay/bisexual still has it’s drawbacks in life. Being forced on most official forms to declare whether you have a marriage OR a civil partnership outs someone’s sexuality and I find that most uncomfortable even if I, speaking for myself, don’t mind someone knowing my sexuality. Why should I be covered by a different law to the one that covers the relationships of my family and friends? I’m not looking for a pretend marriage, or a gay marriage, or an “I can’t believe it’s not marriage” marriage. I want simply a marriage, to the person I love, covered in the same way the marriages of others I care for are covered.

            Continued

          4. I pay my taxes and abide by the law of the land so why does the Government get to decide which consenting adults can enter a marriage?

            Fifth – Responsibilities – The laws covering civil partnerships have no concepts of consummation or adultery. There is no requirement to take any vows. Marriage case law doesn’t necessarily cover civil partnerships.

            There are also other technical differences and perceived differences that I have not covered.

            Equality that is not full equality is not equal.

          5. @Graham

            I agree with everything Daniel has written, I would add:

            Civil partnerships are not enough. They are
            the result of a painful compromise between
            genuine equality and no rights at all – a fallback
            solution which acknowledges that we’re
            entitled to rights, but which continues to
            withhold the symbolically-charged name of
            marriage itself.

            Any ‘alternative status’ that nonetheless
            provides for the same financial benefits
            as marriage in and of itself amounts to
            segregation. This case is about access to a
            deeply meaningful institution – it is
            about equal participation in the activity,
            expression, security and integrity of
            marriage. Any ‘alternative’ to marriage, in my opinion, simply offers the insult of
            formal equivalency without the promise of substantive equality.

            Registered partnerships are no substitute
            for equal marriage. Imagine if the federal
            government prohibited interracial
            couples or Jewish couples from marrying,
            but said we’ll let you register your
            partnership instead.

          6. The very idea is offensive and demeaning.

            In the campaign for equal marriage in South Africa the campaign said in their appeal to the High Court:
            “this ‘separate but “equal”’ approach to
            same sex marriage will not fulfil our
            obligation to full equality for lesbian and
            gay people in South Africa. […]
            Apartheid was pinned on the notion of
            “separate development” […] A deceptive
            discourse was created around all races
            being “separate but equal” […] Keeping
            same-sex relationships institutionally separate only serves to perpetuate discrimination and segregation and needs to be eradicated from our democracy.”

            As long as
            marriage is open only to heterosexuals, and
            civil partnerships only to lesbians and gay
            men, the British government is maintaining a
            symbolic separation of straights and gays, and
            sending out the clear message that our relationships
            are of less value to society than
            heterosexual ones. This is insulting,
            demeaning, and profoundly discriminatory:
            an affront to social justice

          7. and human rights.

            Due to complexities in the UK basic state pension, the benefits are not equal for civil partners as compared to married couples. Another issue is that civil partnership is not called marriage, so that gay men and lesbians are immediately recognisable on paper, leading to discrimination issues. There is also some concern over the current law that does not enable the rights that have arisen as a result of civil partnership to be backdated, meaning anyone in a same sex relationship before 2005 do not receive the rights as an opposite-sex partnership.

          8. Well they said it far better than I could.

            I will go out for dinner more often and leave others to answer for me lol

  2. Oh now she’s Out4Marriage? Sorry don’t beleive anything that come from this woman. How could she be Out4marriage when she’s about to introduce a piece of legislation that would break up not only civil partners but also entire families? Her recent stint on new spousal visa rules have made me dislike her even more.

    Unless i’m making £25,700 my partner may not be able to stay with me in the UK. Can’t stand the woman and i really wish pink news would stop trying to persuade it’s readers to be empathic to the Conservative Party

    1. She may not be perfect but she has done a lot for the LGBT community on the whole amongst other things and she deserves our gratitude. I’m not exactly a tory fan but I have a lot of respect for Theresa May and the genuine efforts she has gone to in an attempt to improve the country.

  3. This is positive news and I for one welcome her comments.

  4. This is very important news.

    Ben Cohen and Mike Buonaiuto stepped up and are doing a bang-up job. Thank you.

    And Ben, if you’re reading – when do you have time to do your day job?

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 24 May 2012, 2:19pm

      I second that, well done to both!

    2. And there’s a big team in Out4Marriage – around 20 volunteers, including Conor and James who set up C4EM, also supporting Mike and Ben. We’ve been e-mailing MPs and personalities, managing the social media sites, creating graphics and editing videos for the campaign.

      It really is grassroots. Anyone reading should consider recording their own video.

      We need to show the doubters that there is a BIG support for equal marriage.

      1. Thanks to Ben, Mike, James and the band of supporters of Out4Marriage – what you are doing is incredible!

        Is there any help you would like?

        1. Yes there is! If you want to help, e-mail hello@out4marriage.org x

          1. I shall email tonight or first thing in the morning!

  5. Robert in S. Kensington 24 May 2012, 2:19pm

    Marvellous! Thank you, yet again, Theresa May. First the article in the Times, and now this. She has truly evolved 360 degrees, a valuable asset to her party. Let’s hope more will follow her excellent example. Well done!

    1. Er, but 180 degrees. Otherwise she’s be back where she started. :)

      1. Lol Sasha – perhaps revolved in thought makes it 360? ;-)

        1. :) Frankly, who cares? I’m just as delighted as anyone else to see someone of Mrs May’s stature joining the cause.

          S xx

          1. I agree. Her support is superb.

            Was just a tongue in cheek joke follwoing your comment – sheesh!

  6. I still find myself in a state of confusion when thanking a Tory for being so damn decent, but thank her I must! I may be a child of the 80s, but some Tories have really come a long way.

    Thank you for fighting the good fight!

    1. I know it doesnt feel quite right to be thanking a Tory for being strong on equality – but in this case its very right – particularly given her transformation.

  7. Fantastic news – another REAL statesman supports equal marriage, shows that he supports equality and fairness. Gen Colin Powell. Yee Hah!

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/23/powell-favors-same-sex-marriage/?on.cnn=2

    “In terms of the legal matter of creating a contract between two people that’s called marriage, and allowing them to live together with the protection of law, it seems to me is the way we should be moving in this country. And so I support the president’s decision.”

    “I respect the fact that many denominations have different points of view with respect to gay marriage and they can hold that in the sanctity in the place of their religion and not bless them or solemnize them,”

    You know sometimes I have to stop myself and ask “Is this really happening, are the people that matter beginning to really get it?” The answer undoubtedly is YES. The time is NOW. Change is coming. YES WE CAN!

  8. Thank you Theresa May.

    Have a lovely day.

  9. Sometimes i really believe pink news readers are fickle. Someone says they’re out4marriage and all of a sudden everyone believes them and not question their motive.

    Can i draw your eyes to
    http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/06/18/theresa-may-says-sportsmen-and-newspaper-editors-must-take-action-against-homophobia/

    this is the same woman that “voted against equalising the age of consent, the repeal of Section 28, against gay couples jointly adopting and against lesbian IVF rights and was absent for other votes.”

    1. So she is not allowed to change her mind, or does that make her fickle too?

    2. Dr Robin Guthrie 24 May 2012, 5:21pm

      She has “evolved” in her thinking.

      Perhaps it’s time you did to and moved on from the past.

    3. Some people when presented with empirical evidence which runs contrary to their opinions change their mind. Many conservatives oppose change because they fear unexpected side effects, she’s seen those fears are false. Some on the other hand just like to feels superior, I get the impression she’s from the former camp not the latter.

  10. i wish i could believe her, but i find it hard to believe that the same person that voted against equalizing age of consent in 1998 voted against repealing section 28 in 2000 also against equalizing adoption rights for gay couples in 2001 and 2002, didn’t vote for civil partnerships in 2004. Now says that she supports gay marriage. David Cameron’s record is also far from spotless on the issue, he also voted against the repeal of Section 28, and opposed Gay adoption. I just feel that the Tories are trying to come across as Progressive Conservatives in order to attract votes from young voters and LGBT voters. Secondly to keep there coalition partners happy. I may be wrong but i am still suspicious of the Conservative Party’s motives.

    1. I find it hard to trust Conservatives too.

      My dad was a miner in the miners strike – I have good cause emoitonally (in addition to Clause 28 etc etc) to struggle to trust Tories.

      However, Theresa May (and she is not the only one) certainly appear to have genuinely had a transformation and understand and get equality. In some areas they might not go as far as I would like but nonetheless they go further than I would ever have expected a Tory to go in my lifetime!

      I understand you reticence to thank, trust or even acknowledge that change – but I think we have to accept that the Tories are part of the coalition government and if we want change now then we have to support the Tories in achieving that.

      Mind you, if they fail to deliver then any rumblings of possible trust will be lost for many generations.

      1. Yeah i never thought about that. Im hoping my home country Scotland decides to go ahead with introducing Gay marriage, i have a feeling the Scottish govenment will but will not find out until june, when the consulation has been fully reviewed. I hope the England and Wales do the same. :)

      2. I guess, i never thought about it like that. I guess i was just really untrusting of the Tories because of there habbit of interfearing in Scottish Politics. I really hope my Homecountry Scotland decides to go ahead with a Gay marriage bill, i have a feeling they will. Wont find out until june when the consultation papers are fully reviewed. I also I really do hope our neigbours England and Wales get marrage equality to :D

        1. Sorry…. for posting twice thought my first post didnt come up. :(

        2. I hope so too Char, both Scotland and England

    2. Tim Chapman 24 May 2012, 8:04pm

      She’s my MP so I know her voting records. She did vote for CPs. I remember this because on LBGT issues she has always voted the opposite to what I wanted her to do as my representative. I would have voted for equalising the age of consent, for the repeal of 28 etc, but against CP because I wanted a marriage, not a CP. Others, including May have now caught up with me, so I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt.

      One thing’s for sure, she cannot ever go back to her old ways without losing all credibility. How she’s said it, she can’t take it back wheather she means it or not. If she’s pretending, she’s got to keep on pretending. Personally, I don’t care what her motives are, so long as she delivers.

      1. Tim Chapman 24 May 2012, 8:06pm

        …Now she’s said it….

      2. I agree Tim. She used to be my MP for a couple of years when I lived in Berkshire. She has very clearly and unambiguously said what she intends to do and why. She can’t go back on this without losing all credibility.

  11. Peter & Michael 24 May 2012, 6:27pm

    Yes, Well let’s just hope that this measure comes into being as soon as possible. Coming into our 33rd year of being together, Yes, OK, we had a civil partnership in 2005, but this was never going to be equal to the Equality we were promised.
    Let us just hope that Same-Sex Civil Marriage comes into law as soon as possible.

  12. Thank you for speaking up Home Secretary! Like many other LGBTs of a certain age, I have spent a large amount of time and energy in my life cursing evil Tories and the few times I voted for you in my hormone-fuelled youth. Now I don’t know what to think (or how to vote!)! You, Callmedave, lovely Francis Maude, Margot James, Desmond Swayne and others are truly making history here and I for one think that is absolutely brilliant. Clearly there are are a few die-hards who want to waste their time wallowing in their selfish, Thatcherized dream world (hello Sir Roger Gale!) but there again there are a lot of separatist LGBTs of a certain age who would also rather wallow in their selfish, ghettoized dream world rather than embrace the bigger equality picture. I guess that evens things out. You are showing true leadership to those of us who want to ‘get over’ past battles and hurts and move on into a bright new future where LGBTs have full and equal rights and dignity in the eyes of the law.

  13. @Aiden

    Well you’d know about that, eh ? For someone with a proven track record of lying, it’s a bit rich to accuse anyone else of dissembling.

    Do you think your posting here is actually achieving anything ? Other than make the nasty little parties you support, the BNP, British Freedom Party, look even worse ?

  14. Here’s a few more for you Aiden, you are a loser closet case.

  15. Neil Basterfield 25 May 2012, 7:37am

    I had the opportunity to thank Theresa for her public support of this issue last night at a meeting in Maidenhead, however, when I challenged her on the decision to make this a free vote for Tory MPs, she stated that in her opinion it wasd a matter of conscience. This, in my view, significantly weakens her case for supporting this. How can a matter of equal rights be on of conscience? I don’t remember any other piece of recent equality legislatioon being put to a free vote…

    1. Sister Mary Clarence 25 May 2012, 8:48am

      I’m not sure I entirely agree with that Neil. If its a free vote and an overwhelming majority of Tory MPs vote in favour of equal marriage will that not send a stronger message to the electorate than a whipped vote?

      In effect what we are seeing is a public but slightly more subtle whipping of MPs with the very strong public statements that are coming out from high in the party. Tory MPs can be in no doubt where their leadership is standing, and there has even been a coup on the 1922 committee of backbenchers where the old guard were ousted and replaced with Cameron loyalists.

      Any MP looking to vote against equal marriage will know they are going up against the front and the back benches.

      Nothing in this life is free, and on this occasion that includes a ‘free’ vote

  16. Accompanied by action – unlike yours

  17. I fully agree with Along’s comment. A leopard never changes its spots. Time for PinkNews and its readers to get realistic and realise that LGBT rights in the UK are far from acceptable. It’s not all sunshine, lollipops and rainbows. Keep fighting the good fight.

    1. So, because there are aspects of policy that some of us do not like, that means we doubt changes of opinion on other matters where there is clear evidence of change?

      If we want change – we have to accept and embrace the fact that we need to convince others to change their minds, when they do change their minds we need to work with that – not say “I don’t believe you have changed even though I have been trying to convince you to change for years – I don’t really believe you ever will”. If we want people to change then (particularly when they are in power) we need to accept that and work with it. Not blindly, not naively, not failing to hold them to account – but working with it and challenging them that if they fail to deliver then they will be known for the breach of promise they have made – and lose quanitifable support. We also need to pursue them to change in other areas too.

      If we have been seeking change for many years – then politicians do change – we need to work with it.

  18. Spanner1960 27 May 2012, 10:19am

    If this is such a guarantee, why the need for a consultation?

    All it has managed to achieve is for the likes of C4M to have time to spread their disinformation and propaganda.

    Talk is cheap.

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.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all