Thank you, Mr. Lansley.
Mr. Tredinnick should be asked to address the infertile heterosexual married couples. Since they cannot reproduce on their own, would he support a ban on their marrying? I think he should if he insists that marriage is intended for bringing children into the world. Don’t these idiots ever stop and think about what they’re saying? They leave themselves wide-open for ridicule and rebuttals.
Anne Main should also take note. Caving into bigotry, much of it religion based, is a very slippery slope.
I would like to see a national debate begin about abolishing religious marriages altogether, follow the French example. Make civil marriage the standard and for those who want a religious component (solemnisation only), let them have it. After all, the government issue certificates of marriage, not the churches.
Don’t try applying logic to David Tredinnick’s views. He’s the guy who thinks that the NHS should take phases of the moon into account when making medical decisions, and that anyone who disagrees with him is racist because lots of non-white people are into astrology, and he has a Muslim college in his constituency so he should know. He also accepted a bribe from an undercover reporter to ask Parliamentary questions about a non-existent drug, and made Parliamentary expense claims for astrology software and training. He has been an MP since 1987 and is a member of the Health Select Committee – aren’t safe seats fantastic?
Anne Main has voted strongly against LGBT rights since entering parliament in 2005.
It seems that she is not so much “caving in to bigo-tory” as being its cheer-leader.
No end to how far politicians will go to display their biggoted hatred..how convenient to use the church to mass their own guile cowardness…I bet they wouldn’t be so hesitant if it came to a vote for their pay raise in the commons…pure scum…
As a Canadian I am appalled to read the gall of these politicians in the Commons…What are they afraid of…even so guile as to use the church to mass their own hatred and biggoted ideas….I bet they would not be so hesitant if it came to pushing a bill to increase their own pay…So scummy…
I am heartened by his carefully chosen words “unless they wish to do so”- which (hopefully) means that when the Bill is published it will include provision for those churches who wish to do so- to marry gay and lesbian couples who want to get married in a church.
Indeed. How could the government justify adding protections in the bill to prevent churches and synagogues being forced to do something they don’t want, but neglect to add similar protections for those that do? The obvious hypocrisy of it would destroy any good feeling the government could hope to gain.
I think it would be an excellent thing to do, get it out of the way in one go, unlike the religious component for CPs. I wouldn’t mind betting the CoE and Roman cults will be ranting again if it is included. They’ll be charging that this too will eventually force them to open their doors to gay couples marrying in their churches, another red herring of course. I wish all of those churches who want to participate would counter the hateful rhetoric coming from both of them, really embarrass the tossers and shut them up once and for all. If anyone is in a good position to call them bigots it’s them, the Unitarians, Quakers, Liberal and Reformed Judaism and some supportive Anglican clergy and hierarchy.
It really feels like the waiting will soon be over. I’m excited.
Is speaker of the House of Commons not John Bercow? He is in favor of same-sex marriage too.
Leader of the House is a government position, who acts as a bridge between the executive power of the Cabinet and the legislative power of the Commons. The Speaker is a purely Parliamentary position, equivalent to chairperson of House of Commons.
Good on you Andrew L. Much more courage than the others who are no doubt thinking of their parliamentary majority at the next election
Those tory MPs who oppose this must think that only the elderly and the religious extemists are likely to vote for them anyway
Thank you Mr Lansley, there is certainly no inconsistency in being a right of centre party and supporting individual liberty.
The guys I am struggling to understand are those who claim to be at least partly libertarian yet oppose the right of tax paying consenting adults to marry? What’s that about. Are they libertarians or theocrats ?
“My constituents made a powerful and forceful argument to retain the current definition of marriage.”
Care to enlighten us Anne? Just what new killer argument did those four old Christians you’re pictured with on your website with come up with that is so different from the usual discredited bilge?
David Tredinnick was absent at most of the voting on LGBT rights including the CP act and equality act. Let’s hope he’s also absent when the SSM bill is voted on!
Well done Andrew. You get my vote.