Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Scottish government reveals marriage consultation figures

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. “A Scotland for Marriage spokesman said: “We are deeply unhappy at the decision by the Scottish Government to proceed with its plans to redefine marriage by proceeding with legislation which will penalise and punish those who disagree with redefining marriage.”

    Uh, how so exactly? You won’t even know it’s there!

    1. she clearly did not read the official announcement about freedom of religion. What is it? They think if they repeat the victim lie enough times people will start to believe it?

  2. And not one of those in opposition could have offered a cogent and legitimate argument other that didn’t involve prejudice or the assumed wishes of a fictional deity.

    There is not – and never has been – a legitimate argument to deny legally competent consenting adults who obey the law and pay their taxes like every other citizen the same full spectrum of rights.

    1. I think we can categorise the majority as

      “God says…..”

      “Procreation……”

      “Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve”

      “Sodomy is sin”

      “Think of the children!!!!

      “What next animals/children/polygamy”

      and then a few in Other

  3. I don’t know how people can keep a straight face while naming their organisation “Scotland for Marriage” when the purpose of their organisation is to prevent people from getting married.

  4. ” that no faith or individual celebrant should be forced to conduct a gay wedding against their will.”

    But what about a priest who wants to carry out a ceremony, but isn’t permitted to by his church? Will the church be able to sack the priest? If so, seems that “matters of conscience” are a one way thing in favour of anti-LGBT discrimination.

    1. I think that no individual should be forced out of conducting weddings either.

  5. Churches in Scotland are already disestablished from the Scottish government. They already don’t have to do what they don’t want to do, and no one, not even governments, can legislate against them. So why on earth is the Scottish government now considering introducing new measures to protect them when they are already protected IN LAW NOW?

    1. because technically they arnt protected fully, when it came to the civil partnership on religious premises there would be no legal case to answer however several neutral shall we say legal professionals have said under marriage there could potentially be a legal case under current equality law, that’s under a very specific interpretation of the law mind you but the chance in of itself is reason enough to make a very tiny amendment to the equalities act to remedy this

      1. As long as it’s made quite clear that this new “law” of exclusion isn’t just against gay people, but against anyone, gay or straight, from challenging the church, so be it. Otherwise it’s discrimination by the back door. I don’t care if this “tiny amendment to the equalities act”(you can’t have an act about equality when you seek to make inequalities as part of it), is microscopic. It would still be discrimination.

      2. I haven’t heard of a single gay couple in Canada forcing some religiosity cult to perform a wedding. Can you imaging the script from the very unhappy (child-abusing) priest?

        “Despite the fact that you will burn eternally for your deviancy and immoral lifestyle choices, I abhorently pronounce you husband and husband. May all your body extremities fall off from pestilence and may you be cursed forever. Kissing not permitted here.” (Joe Rat. and his abuse-enabling gang attack all participants with holy rocks and sticks after the service.)

        Not going to happen.

        1. That There Other David 25 Jul 2012, 10:09pm

          The whole idea is just some nonsense from those who wish to deny us equal rights. Personally I can’t believe anyone is stupid enough to fall for it, but apparently there are humans amongst us that are that naive.

        2. katie MUrphy - ex cath 26 Jul 2012, 7:41am

          Joe Rat – good, took a couple sec on thatone

          w about pope RATZInger? Sxxg Hxxl

      3. They are already protected under existing law where they do not have to marry anyone which they feel they cannot marry for whatever reason. They are just being stupid and demanding that discrimination be put into the law.

      4. Ducky

        Article 9 would protect their religious freedom.

        Legal experts (from reputable rather than religious (and thus biased) backgrounds and/or organisations) have stated so, repeatedly.

  6. “We also intend to protect the current situation whereby the faith content of the curriculum in Catholic denominational schools is determined by the Scottish Catholic Education Service.”

    What does that mean? Surely the iline saying the mportance of marriage to family life and bringing up of children is relevant regardless of the gender of the parents….I hope there isn’t going to be a whole list of concessions and opt outs from reality. I accept churches don’t have to perform SS marriages but lets not give too much away!!!

    1. It means a free for all for Catholic schools, because now it will be entrenched in law to teach what the hell they like – be it a flat earth, creationism, or the evil gays.

      1. In 2008, the Scottish Goverment gave in to demands from the Catholic church over safe sex leaflets to be given to school girls with their cervical cancer vaccination. The church wanted all mention of condoms removed. The SNP agreed but not just for Catholic schools, the new leaflets were given to all schools in Scotland so that all Scottish school girls are subjected to Catholic dogma whether she is Catholic or not.

        1. katie MUrphy - ex cath 26 Jul 2012, 7:48am

          the church opposed condoms in the USA even during the height of the aids epidemic

          their message to gay people – die.

          or should gays become like the sex starved pedoriests – abusers hidden by the vicar of christ himself.

          the pope is like the word for a womans plug / rag on the bad week
          bloody K{}n 9cross symbol

    2. katie MUrphy - ex cath 26 Jul 2012, 7:44am

      In order to let the church do religous education in their schools, you should insure that they dont get a cent of govt money. this is an issue in canada.

      The root of the problem is catholic “teaching ” of hate and discrimination. SAve the children!!! as well as save them from the

      Pedoriests

  7. the bigots are now whining about how their prepopulated petitions and postcards weren’t given the same weight as the proper consultation replies. Guess what: it was a consultation and NOT a poll. In a consultation, you are more likely to be listened to if you back up your reply with a compelling argument and evidence, NOT by just ticking a box on a postcard or signing a petition. MORE people said YES to equal marriage and gave good reasons for it than people who said NO. That’s why the Govt decided in favour of bringing forward a draft bill.

  8. I’m getting really fed up of all the extra protections religions have. We can’t even have equality without the religions getting extra laws first so the equality laws won’t apply to them.

    I used to believe in freedom of religion but due to this whole equal marriage debate, I now don’t care in the least about religious freedom because that freedom is more often than not about hating gay people.

    1. You and me really seem to be on the same wavelength recently. I agree 100% with you here.

      Religion never used to bother me, but now, seeing as they seem intent on hating me with a passion to the extent of telling me that apparently I can’t have a family, nor am I worthy of the same rights as every straight person; I have no qualms in hating religion in turn.*

      * of course, Quakers, Unitarians et al are excluded, as they’ve -never- hated on us, mainly because those guys actually read the bible properly.

      1. You’re right of course about the pro-gay religions such as the Quakers, I tend to forget about them. I don’t mean to tar all religious people with the same brush, but it’s very difficult not to do so when the official positions of the major religions are so anti-gay, so full of hatred.

        I was brought up as a Catholic & I’m now an athiest and it’s because of the Catholic church’s attitude to gay people that I now feel the way I do about religion. When they cause their own followers to turn away and become athiests, then they really have a serious problem.

        1. Robert in S. Kensington 25 Jul 2012, 6:45pm

          I too was once Catholic BennieM, but gave it up for the same reasons. It in fact drove me to atheism when I looked at the disgusting things the church had been and still continues to do in regard to gay people and others it seeks to oppress and marginalise. Their message is one of pure evil, inciting hatred and homophobia by their words and actions. Hardly what one could call ‘christlike’, far removed from it in fact.

          1. So they’ve driven both of us away with their hatred, I wonder how many more! Isn’t it poetic justice that it’s the church’s own actions that will be it’s downfall in the end when it drives every one away! I realise that won’t happen in our life times, but I’ve no doubt it will happen.

  9. James Hollander 25 Jul 2012, 5:07pm

    Why was the gay community in Scotland incapable of running a “well-funded campaign” during the consultation process?

    As an American, I am really struck by the passivity of the gay community in Scotland and in the UK generally. As 2/3 of the public supports equality, you should have dominated the consultation statistics. Similarly, in England/Wales, the opposition created a petition drive, garnering 500,000 signatures. The gay community did nothing organized to respond and the burden fell to a private couple who only managed about 1/10 the number of signatories.

    Passivity, apathy, and overconfidence will cause your supporters to lose confidence in the face of opposition. Can’t you see that?

  10. Robert in S. Kensington 25 Jul 2012, 6:43pm

    Let’s hope the figures for the consultation alone in England are a lot better but I suspect they will be similar to Scotland’s. The hatemongers were and are well-organised and were already ahead as soon as the consultation began which explains their significantly higher numbers in excess of 550,000 signatures in the C4M petition while C4EM only managed to get a paltry 55,000+ and started a bit late in the game, something that should haver been foreseen long before the consultation began. That the Out4Marriage campaign has only garnered 42 videos isn’t a significant number either.

    As long as we can get at least two thirds in Parliament voting yes, then I will be happy even though it faces the obstacle of the HoL having the final word.

    1. When you look ag actusl responses rather than postcard responses etc, a majority was in favour of equal marriage. I can’t see it being all that different in England & Wales, it’s not like Scotland is very different culturally & socially.

      I was disappointed at both STV and BBC Scottish news programmes which both led with the SG announcement to go ahead with equal marriage “despite the consultation being overwhelming against it.” Both used phrases like that.

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 25 Jul 2012, 9:23pm

        BennieM, at least we can take comfort that consultation results really don’t translate into anything. I believe (could be wrong) but the figures were similar after the consultation for CPs was introduced.

        As for the STV and BBC, what can we expect, especially from the BBC. It rarely ever gives unbiased reporting favouring LGBT people. What it does is enable the bigots in opposition. I can just hear the Anne Widdecombe’s of this world prattling on about how the vast majority of the British public are against it, as if consultations represent a true concensus of the population.. The fact of the matter is, a lot of our supporters didn’t bother to complete the government survey in Scotland or in England, so it really doesn’t mean anything. Both governments knew at the outset that there would be a lot of opposition and of course because they are so full of hatred responded in droves aided and abetted by religious hierarchies and their shills such as the Christian Institute.

        1. It just gave the impression that the SG are pushing this through when a majority of people are against it – which is of course not true. For both the BBC and STV main Scottish news programmes was very disappointing. Maybe I’m being naive but I didn’t expect such a negative spin to be put on it by news broadcasters.

  11. I know a majority of MSPs have pledged support for equal marriage, but I wonder if the 46 who haven’t yet declared their voting intentions will now do so as the consultation responses have now been published and the SG have made their decision to go ahead with legislation – after all, that is the reason most have given for not declaring! It would be really good to get a large majority voting for it rather than just 9 or 10 more than necessary.

  12. New Aussie 26 Jul 2012, 1:54am

    The Catholic church has spent huge amounts on an intemperate campaign to derail the Scottish government on this issue. This can be seen in that when you factor out the largely religious postcard campaigns, petitions and foreign submissions and focus only on the personal submissions by ordinary Scottish people, the responses are overwhelmingly supportive of equal marriage.

    It is also notable that the new archbishop of glasgow has successfully united politicians to defy the church through his idiotic comments about the death of David Cairns:
    http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/sorry-archbishop-elect-philip-tartaglia-to-meet-late-gay-mp-s-partner-1-2432903

    I always said when they started on this path that if they wished for a fight to the death, they should be careful what they wished for.

  13. How pathetic that the Roman Catholic church could only motivate 20,000 of its parishioners across the whole of Scotland to write in opposition. It shows that the majority of catholics disagree with the hysterical line the leadership is taking.

    1. I’m Scots, Catholic and living in England. I know just how little most of the objections to marriage equality are worth. A singularly unconvincing Pastoral Letter from the archbishops telling us it was our “duty” to sign the anti-equality petition and people signing it without any thought partly from prejudice partly from unspoken pressure for conformity. An easy way to feel “virtuous” at other people’s expense.
      I’m straight but have a son who’s gay and it’s got me actively campaigning for LGBT rights. I just didn’t realise the level of hatred that still exists till this came up, so it’s done some good in a perverse way.

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