Reader comments · UK: Anti-equal marriage conference held in Blackpool · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


UK: Anti-equal marriage conference held in Blackpool

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. “On its website, the society has been promoting the C4M petition against the government’s plans to introduce civil marriage equality along with a “step-by-step guide” on how to lobby parliamentarians against supporting the measure.”

    And which way to the details on how to lobby for divorce to be outlawed? Something it’s proven can be detrimental to children. Wouldn’t want to seem hypocritical would they?

    1. Cardinal Capone 3 Oct 2012, 11:34am

      Excellent point, they are very selective about who they attack. But they wouldn’t want to discriminate, would they :~

  2. I am hearing that straw clutching sound again.

    They talk of how changing the law would undermine things but cannot produce one shred of evidence to back up their claims.

    “Marriage will be undermined because we will no longer be able to teach our children that marriage exists to protect them.” How, exactly? And what about the children who need care where their straight families have fallen apart?

    1. Cardinal Capone 3 Oct 2012, 11:38am

      They trot out meaningless clichés, which if they believe, they are delusional, if they don’t, they are being untruthful.

  3. GulliverUK 3 Oct 2012, 11:23am

    I’d say they have now strayed completely away from their anti-choice anti-abortion purpose and in to political matters which don’t concern them, and thus should be investigated by the charity commission – as should quite a few other charities. Their link between gay marriage causing more abortions is so absurd it ridicules their whole organisation, it’s a PR nightmare, and organisational suicide to let the public know just how crazy you are.

    But at the end of the day, they’re religious extremists, nothing more, nothing less, and it’s best to ignore them.

    1. I don’t like abortion ! But these people are its most effective advocate !

    2. Have you reported them to the charities commission?
      I agree that there is no link – well actually there is but its a positive one!
      until someone does something about it and complains to the authorities they will continue – you seam to know a lot about it – have you complained?

  4. Is it just me- but I am getting increasingly disconcerted by the co-ordinated opposition to equal marriage. Is it only me who thinks the pendulum is starting to edge in thw wrong direction now? I just think that the prospect of equal civil marriage is beginning now to flow away from us. Maybe I am unduly pessimistic-but its just a gut feeling I am beginning to getr.

    1. Cardinal Capone 3 Oct 2012, 11:40am

      All paths lead to Rome.

    2. Cardinal Capone 3 Oct 2012, 11:41am

      Yes you are being unduly pessimistic. It is a done deal.

      1. Paddyswurds 3 Oct 2012, 11:45am

        If it is a done deal why hasn’t CallmeDave tabled the motion. What is the hold up. I am willing to be it will not be in the queens speech next month…….

        1. Paddyswurds 3 Oct 2012, 11:46am


        2. Equality Network 3 Oct 2012, 3:50pm

          The Queen’s Speech is no longer in November, because Parliament now has a fixed five-year term – this one, starting in May 2010 and ending in May 2015. The last Queen’s Speech was in May this year, so the next one will probably be May 2013.

      2. Cardinal Capone 3 Oct 2012, 12:04pm

        It is a done deal, but you are right to keep up the pressure and momentum to make it happen as soon as possible. But it will happen inevitably sooner or later. The opposition is a small group of people tilting at windmills.

        1. Robert in S. Kensington 3 Oct 2012, 12:24pm

          I hope that is correct. However, we have that final obstacle to get over, the House of Lords that is infested with right wing bigots and 26 Anglican clerics, although two or three are supportive.

          1. Paddyswurds 3 Oct 2012, 12:45pm

            Well if CallmeDave is genuine he will override their objections with the Parliamentary thingy they have for that purpose….

          2. Cardinal Capone 3 Oct 2012, 12:57pm

            Well maybe make sure the vote happens when the bishops are busy elsewhere, such as at the Synod. Actually I think only two or three may actually attend and they take it in turns.

    3. I can understand your concern. However, do bear in mind that this ‘organisation’ SPUC could only persuade 150 people to attend their conference. Also, the very well funded C4M have only convinced the equivalent of roughly 1.5% of the adult population of the UK to sign their petition. I say equivalent because there has been no independent audit of the figures to rule out, amongst other things, multiple signatures as well as people from overseas signing. There is a well funded very active evangelical right wing christian lobby, but that often creates the impression that they are represent a larger constituency than is actually the case. I think they punch above their weight.

      Remember that virtually every poll conducted by respecting organisations has found that the majority of people are in favour of equal civil marriage.

    4. You don’t need to get discouraged. It is the loudest voices that are heard but that doesn’t mean that the vast majority of people are opposed. Most of that vast majority is and will remain silent. They are supportive but their main attitude is: don’t mind, don’t care, can’t be bothered, and, well: it doesn’t affect me, does it? So yeah, why not.
      That’s a deafening silence.
      But what those overly loud voices are saying is what proves their futility: they’re jumping the shark. They utter such obnoxious nonsense and toxic drivel that it puts off those who…

    5. …who haven’t thought much about the issue.

      The proposals aren’t progressing at a rapid pace because of the time span that the legislative process has to go through (“by 2015” was mentioned?). However, the PM, senior ministers etc have officially stated their explicit support for equal marriage. They can’t walk that back without losing way too much credibility. They are not going to do that.

      Also, there is the coalition for equal marriage’s page detailing which MP supports and opposing equal marriage:
      The figures show an overwhelming trend for support.

      Then there’s polls of the population which again show suport.

      I hope that puts your mind at rest. But let’s not let up!

  5. Kimiko Kotani 3 Oct 2012, 11:25am

    “Marriage will be undermined because we will no longer be able to teach our children that marriage exists to protect them.”

    I’m not even going to bother with the whole fallacy of the concept that marriage is only for people to get together and produce children. I do wish to point out that if these folks believe that one of the purposes of marriage is to protect children, then they need to change their stance gay people have children too- how about giving them the same legal protections and social standing? Hmm?

  6. SPUC are evil, right wing religious scum.

    What on EARTH is an anti-abortion group doing getting involved in an equal marriage discussion.

    Any same sex couple who gets pregnant is highly unlikely to terminate the pregnancy.

    SPUC receives funding from extremist US churches.

    They were heavily involved in trying to ban divorce in Ireland in the 1990’s.

    They are extremist wingnuts.

    1. Cardinal Capone 3 Oct 2012, 12:32pm

      I think traditionally they were or are Catholic, but they appear to have had Evangelical support since the 90s.

  7. Paddyswurds 3 Oct 2012, 11:41am

    One wonders how many of the 150 homophobic bigots meeting in Blackpool were divorced , some perhaps several times?

    1. Very few I imagine.

      SPUC pretends otherwise but it is an evangelical religious group and receives heavy funding from evangelical christian groups in the US.

      A more appropriate question would be – ‘How many male SPUC members beat their wives because the buybull allows it?’


      ‘How many female SPUC members do not submit to their husbands’ will as demanded by the buybull?’

      1. Mumbo Jumbo 3 Oct 2012, 1:28pm

        They are also the kind of people who wear mixed fibres.

        1. Spanner1960 3 Oct 2012, 3:30pm

          PolyCotton Shirt!!?? HERESY!!

    2. GulliverUK 3 Oct 2012, 3:57pm

      Actually, Evangelicals have a high rate of divorce, apparently — I remember reading it in the religion section of the Huffington Post. They have been very reluctant to have that fact made public. The fact is they can’t seen to make their marriages work, and I’m guessing it’s because they lack a GSOH and are always uptight about everyone else on the planet doing things which they disapprove of. Perhaps we should feel honoured to be included in the long list of groups they disapprove of and hate on? Think of their hating on us as relieving a little bit of pressure on people from other cultures, faiths, women, immigrants, youth and single-mothers. :D

      1. That, and they’ve been driven insane by guilt over their own same-sex leanings and married a woman on the rebound. And when it all gets too much, the spineless inevitably act out their shameful desires on the vulnerable in their care (i.e. children), then have the audacity to project their abuse onto gay people and cry “Deviant!”

  8. Cardinal Capone 3 Oct 2012, 11:46am

    Equal marriage is inevitable. Little groups like this are just waving a sword in the wind. No one really takes any notice.

    1. Equal marriage is indeed inevitable.

      Which makes me wonder why we are STILL waiting for a timetable from the Tories as to when it will be introduced.

      Perhaps LGBTory can tell us? (just my little joke.)

    2. Mumbo Jumbo 3 Oct 2012, 1:30pm

      “Little groups like this are just waving a sword in the wind.”

      You can get arrested for that kind of thing :-)

  9. SPUC are opposed to abortion, even when the pregnancy is as the result of a rape, or where the pregnancy could prove fatal to the mother.

    1. Paddyswurds 3 Oct 2012, 5:14pm

      Don’t the xtians believe that a woman cannot get preggers from rape? or does that only apply to American rape victims….lol

  10. Isn’t this just a catholic organisation under another name? Why have they got charitable status?

    1. Originally catholic, now there is also a large evangelical christian influene.

      1. The funding mostly comes from certain very large, American, family trusts, sometimes via such tax-free foundations as the Chiaroscuro Foundation, as I recall from researching it in the 1990s. The Roman cult and the evangelical protestants (especially the Baptists and Pentecostals) quite remarkably have set aside their centuries of antagonism where misogynist pressure (against women and those others who don’t abide by their common faith rules on gender roles) is concerned. They are reportedly keen to join equally with other faiths whose slaughter they have previously advocated on this too; well probably not equally, the Pope probably sees himself at the head. SPUC is just one tentacle.

  11. We demand the right to teach the children of gays that they are not a proper family.
    We demand the right to teach them that their parents are evil sinners.
    We demand the right to tell them they are unnatural.
    We demand the right to victimise and humiliate any child who realises that they are different – to prevent them from knowing that homosexuality is a natural and frequent occurrence among all races.
    We demand the right to torture gay children and call it therapy.
    We demand the right to instill fear and loathing, through ignorance, in all other children so that they will grow up filled with hate.

    All this on the basis of a book that we have not read, from a society that we kind of agree with the vibe of what they say on most things, but don’t really subscribe to fully.

    If our demands are not met we shall scream persecution and don’t you dare call us bigots!

  12. “Marriage will be undermined because we will no longer be able to teach our children that marriage exists to protect them.”

    No, it won’t and there’ll be nothing stopping you continuing to teach that. LGBT people can and do have children too so that argument is stupid and discriminatory. Added to that, the mere exixtence of married infertile couples who are unable to have children hasn’t stopped you teaching that, has it?

    “If we alter the definition, we undermine marriage, we undermine the family and we undermine society.”

    Let me rephrase that for you, SPUC: “If we alter the definition of voting by allowing women to vote, we undermine democracy and we undermine society”. True? No, of course not – and neither’s your silly, illogical statement.

  13. Cardinal Capone 3 Oct 2012, 12:20pm

    It also seems like these small religious extremist groups are just glad of a “respectable” way to express homophobic views, whilst simultaneously denying that’s what they are doing.

    For example, mixed race marriages were said to be dangerous in 1960s America. Say this conference were “defending marriage” against such a thing happening. Would they be defending marriage, or simply being racist?

    This conference is not defending marriage either. It is simply being homophobic.

  14. Robert in S. Kensington 3 Oct 2012, 12:21pm

    I wonder if they’re telling children about hetero married couples who can’t procreate and those who don’t want any children? How will that undermine society and stop others from procreating? These lunatics are really painting themselves into a corner and before too long, will never be able to get out of. Don’t they realise just how stupid they are?

    That they are lobbying parliamentarians to vote no is nothing more than subverting democracy and the political process under the guise of religious beliefs. Something needs to be done to shut them up once and for all.

    1. Cardinal Capone 3 Oct 2012, 12:43pm

      Your second para undermines your first. Lobbying parliament is a part of democracy. However “astroturfing”, by organisations that pretend to be concerned individuals, sending in hundreds of postcards or emails from around the world, to give the false impression that there is widespread concern, does potentially undermine democracy if it is not exposed. Fortunately in Scotland, the astroturfing by the Catholic church was spotted and discounted by the parliament there.

      1. For now… Discounted, thus far.

    2. Cardinal Capone 3 Oct 2012, 1:09pm

      While on the subject of astroturfing, here’s an excerpt from wiki:

      A single employee at an astroturfing operation may create five to seventy different users or online personas to give the impression that a large number of people support their client’s political agenda or have favorable reviews of a product.[3][4] Some astroturfing operations use “persona management software,” which automates the task of creating false identities that appear credible. Accounts are “pre-aged” with several months of activity, before being handed to a professional astroturfer, so they look like established accounts.[3]

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 3 Oct 2012, 6:13pm

        I’m convinced the C4M petition was managed in just such a manner which explains why it refused to disclose its polling methodology, or at least Comres refused to do just that indicating it was client confidentiality that was at stake. How convenient but how transparent.

  15. In this scenario, how can marriage be used to defend children?:

    One abusive parent and another submissive one, until she/he decides to remove the children from such an environment. Marriage was used as an excuse, in the past, to shut up and put up with this behaviour – it was simply accepted as normal…

    Children > marriage – they are NOT equal and are not part of the same package. It angers me if anyone says that they are.

  16. Mr Smeaton and Mr Mullett. No credible links or explanations can back up the scenarios you described, so we can safely assume the missing link and explanation here are your own Homophobia, with capital H …

  17. Dianne Pallett 3 Oct 2012, 1:13pm

    What a load of codswallop! A gay couple cannot have children together but may have children from previous relationships. Whether they are married or not makes absolutely no difference to heterosexual couples – many of whom choose not to have children any way! Gay marriage does not threaten anybody! The sad thing is you will be bringing up your children to be as narrow-minded, ignorant & prejudiced as you are – that is a risk to society. Grow up!!

  18. johnny33308 3 Oct 2012, 1:38pm

    So how is it that homophobia protects unborn children again? Please explain how this is reasonable or even appropriate since this organization was formed to ‘protect’ the fetus, not promote bigotry as a form of ‘protection’….seems these people have confused themselves or been coopted by crazy kkkristian ‘fundamentalists’. In either case their organization has proved it is no longer relevent or meaningful. Disband it…..

  19. Some very twisted logic

  20. It seems to me that if you were really concerned about children, you would be campaigning to give unmarried parents the same rights and responsibilities as married ones. Lots of straight couples are not married, what about those children?

    As always, those opposed to marriage equality don’t have logic on their side.

  21. Spanner1960 3 Oct 2012, 3:28pm

    “…we will no longer be able to teach our children that marriage exists to protect them.”

    In what way will they no longer be protected?
    This people are seriously clutching at straws to find some realistic reason to stop us.

  22. The SPUC just love being martyrs with a constant losing streak don’t they?

    1. That has been an xtian ploy since they first gained any power and used it to kill women who disagreed with their misogyny, and demolish the temples of other cults and steal the sites, executing their temple staff (who were often of sexual minorities) along the way. Its just mind-boggling that people still buy that big lie at all, never mind for nearly two millennia. The Vatican, with all its privilege, power and wealth too.

  23. GulliverUK 3 Oct 2012, 4:08pm

    The real answer is there should be no religious activities in school, except perhaps in passing, when talking about diversity and getting young people to accept and appreciate diffierent cultures.

    Ofcourse they should be teaching children about same-sex attraction and helping them to learn to understand and thus appreciate differences — we don’t want the next generation growing up as messed up as some of their parents. Colour, gender, culture, disability, faith, sexual identity, these are all things which need to be covered.

    I want to see an end to faith schools, and academies unless they teach a core curriculum which includes positive LGBT history, or something similar, and that shouldn’t be optional in other state schools either. Everybody has to be taught how to get along, so they can ALL function together in society, and the world. They can’t do that if same-sex attraction and any mention of equal rights, is swept under the carpet – which is where SPUC would like it kept.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 3 Oct 2012, 6:08pm

      Although I’m an atheist, I wouldn’t want to see an end to faith schools as long as they are privately funded and paid for by the parents, much like public schools. People should have the right to select whatever school they want their child taught in but as for religious based schools, that should be left to the private sector. I don’t think the public should be funding faith schools at all considering that the vast majority of the British public isn’t religious or worships and not everyone is catholic, protestant, jewish or islamic. I’d like to see a national movement start to foment for that.

  24. stephanie 3 Oct 2012, 6:45pm

    why am i at work all day earning a living and people are taking the day off who hate me and are plotting. mega unimpressed.

  25. stephanie 3 Oct 2012, 6:47pm

    why am i at work all day trying to earn a living ant others have time to meet up and plot against me at the same time. some people should really just get a life. x

    1. stephanie 3 Oct 2012, 6:48pm

      so fed up i said it twice

  26. Only 150 people?

  27. They just want publicity,

    1. And, despite being only 150 people gathered in Blackpool, they got it.

  28. Marriage exists to protect children?
    There are plenty of kids who have found that it doesn’t do what it says on the tin.
    And almost entirely the children of marriages heartily endorsed by these nutters.

  29. Does the SP in SPUC stand for Sexist Pigs? The gendered society that they seek to defend is based on an entirely man-made social construct. Adherence to such is sexist and therefore the SPUC guy is lying when he says he does not discriminate. Btw…isn’t ‘do not lie’ one of the ten commandments?

  30. I guess the next thing will be them holding vigils outside registry offices and the churches that do equal marriage, shaking bottles containing plastic immitation fetus in the faces of those trying to enter and telling them they will all go to hell, and filming them and posting the videos online.

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.