Those who insist that CP is as good as marriage – challenge them. Ask them if they would be willing to surrender their “marriage” and call it a civil partnership from now on.
And then when they bluster and say no, make it clear that that is the bloody point.
If they would not accept inferior status, why the bloody hell should we?
Trouble is I bet quite a few would say they would surrender their marriage but only in words. Do it by Action and I bet all hell would break loose about how Christianity is being picked on, blah, blah, blah… you know the rest.
It’s a good argument. The other one I use is “If it’s the same as marriage, why do so many people so vehemently want us not to have it?”
Thanks to Nick Herbert for his video, the more senior politicians release these things the better.
Great to see Nick Herbert making a string stance.
oops – strong!
Good for him.
But how does Nick Herbert reconcile his support for equality with being an MP for a party where so many of his colleagues are neo-fascist homophobic bigots?
Does he believe that Cameron should impose a party whip on this issue?
Does he feel that a minority’s civil rights are a ‘conscience’ matter?
Does he think that a public consultation on our civil rights is grossly offensive?
Does he also support extending CP’s to opposite sex couples?
So, so many unanswered questions.
oh blimey dAVID…. Do you think we’d even be having this discussion about this government if it wasn’t for people like Nick Herbert going in there and making a difference.
Surely you’re not suggesting the the Tories are responsible for ANY of the advances in LGBT rights over the past 40 years?,
Marriage equality (if it is achieved during this parliament) will be achieved in spite of the Tory Party and not because of it.
Thanks to David Cameron’s repulsive cowardice in not imposing a party whip on the issue of marriage equality and his disgusting insistence the LGBT civil rights are a ‘conscience’ matter, an estimated 125 Tory MP’s will vote against it.
Yes Nick Herbert and the quislings of LGBTory refuse to acknowledge this reality.
I don’t want to see Nick Herbert making an ‘Out for Marriage’ video.
I want to see him addressing (or at least condemning) the vicious bigotry of so many of his Tory colleagues.
Oh FFS! So it’s allegedly 125 now is it. First it was 100, then it was 150, now 125. Make up your mind, and provide some evidence while you’re at it
And again you’re using this line “Marriage equality (if it is achieved during this parliament) will be achieved in spite of the Tory Party and not because of it.”
I challenged you before on how that statement is in any way true when, even if, there are indeed 100, 125 or 150 Tory MPs who vote no would still leave a majority of Tory MPs voting yes. Perhaps you might like to answer me this time?
Why didn’t labour do it properly the first time around, “civil partnership” is a farce and we all know it. Oh wait because Tony Blair was also a coward he didn’t want to upset the religious right so he made something “similar but different” to appease the bigots, something so that they could turn around and still say that gay couples are not as good. Gordon Brown lost his nerve on the general election. At the end of his term Gordon Brown wanted to pass the Children, Schools and Families Act which would have allowed faith schools to teach a twisted version of sex education including that gay is not normal.
The current government has made legislation to remove historic convictions for consensual sex, pressurising other countries to decriminalise homosexuality by removing aid, has sent people to Nigeria to explain it to Mugabe and they are now introducing actual civil unions
Labourites are just as bad at bigotry. They only support it now because they want to be re-elected.
Well done Nick Herbert! He makes a good solid argument.
It comes to something when those campaigning against marriage equality insist on Civil Partnerships being equal and yet through a hissy fit when put to them to change all marriages to Civil Partnerships.
They know they are not equal then blatantly lie just to discriminate but for one question, if Civil Partnerships isn’t good enough for them then why others unless you wish to make then second class citizens?
Of course with these people that latter is favourable. They think it makes them powerful in dictating to others but they now fail in their desperate approach and show themselves up for all to see.
Thank you Nick- i agree that entering a Civil Partnership is the most important thing on can do. marriage would put a better understanding on this as a lifetime commitment. Go to it- Thanks
Marriage is not a lifetime commitment.
Divorce is always possible.
Marriage is merely a civil contract that same sex couples are denied access to becauise they are gay.
Every straight person I know including family members told me that would rather have marriage and wouldn’t opt for a CP if they were available.
Thank you, Nick Herbert, well said.
More importantly, all of those MPs in opposition to equal marriage should be asked why they wouldn’t want a CP for themselves if they were available. I can just imagine what their lame responses would be. It would actually prove that it has more to do with their homophobia than anything else. There really is NO rational reason to oppose it.
CP’s need to be available to those opposite sex couples who want them though.
In the Netherlands same sex couples and opposite sex couples have equal access to CP’s and civil marriage.
Brilliantly powerful video by Nick Herbert ! Definitely the Tories’ top star in making the case for equal marriage so effectively.
He’s a real double whammy for all the bigots.
Firstly, he’s a good rôle model: ‘Hey, look at me, I was elected openly gay, I’m in a CP, the sky hasn’t fallen in, so what are you afraid of?’. Even Telegraph/Mail readers couldn’t dislike him: he’d certainly pass any of their ‘potential-son-in-law’ tests’.
Secondly, he makes an eloquent and incisive argument. Great that he doesn’t pull any punches, going on to advocate religious same-sex equal marriage for those organisations who wish to offer it, and vice versa.
A superb example of the New Tories; I think we’ll be seeing a lot more of him before long.
You’d certainly prefer no bread to nine-tenths of a loaf, wouldn’t you?
No matter how good someone or some organisation’s offering happens to be, you always want to rubbish it because of some perceived shortcoming elsewhere that’s not directly relevant.
Would you rather that Arundel had elected someone like Julian Brazier or Ann Widdicombe?
On this issue, we should give wholehearted encouragement to Tories like Nick Herbert. (dAVID, please note that that doesn’t necessarily extend to other Tories and to other Tory policies.)
Above all, if you keep rubbishing positive developments from Oreo, Nick Herbert et al, the only effect will be that no-one will bother to make similar efforts in future.
Is that what you really want?
I think it is, that what he can keep whinging at every bloody little thing!
Simply put – there’s a difference. There shouldn’t be! We march on!