Gay marriage bill will be massacred in the Lords and govt can’t use Parliament Act as it wasn’t in manifesto. Arrogant Cameron knows best
I just flicked through the Parliament Acts (both 1911 and 1949) and I can’t see anything about manifesto promises. Could you point me to the relevant section please?
Actually, the Parliament Act can has has been used to pass bills that didn’t originally feature in the manifesto. It’s the Salisbury Convention that can’t.
That’s what I thought.
And this post by “Matthew” is exactly the same as a tweet from a tory MP…
Plagiarism or trolling, either way, I’m hitting the Report link.
Source BBC News: Conservative MP Stewart Jackson tweeted: “Gay marriage bill will be massacred in the Lords and govt can’t use Parliament Act as it wasn’t in manifesto. Arrogant Cameron knows best.”
You are right to say it will have problems in the lords. However the government can use the parliament act. An act of parliament does not have to be in a governments election manifesto to use the parliament act. One has nothing to do with the other.
See Tory manifesto document “A contract for Equalities ” on Page 14 I believe, where the intention to look at how to introduce marriage equality is clearly outlined.
See no reason to not use the Parliament Act, especially if passed by elected chamber by a big majority.
The unelected Chamber is there to improve legislation, not to assert itself over the elected Chamber.
Oh yes he can, Matthew. The 2010 manifesto did contain equal marriage and how to introduce it. There was an article about that recently from the Tory LGBT chairman, Matthew Sephton. See my other comment below. Sorry to disappoint you.
Great to see the UK Govt following the Scottish Govt’s lead on this!
Now anyone taking bets on what the Front page of tomorrow’s Daily Mail/Telegraph will be? Hmmmm!! lol
it’s already on the Online Mail’s page.
Organise by “Best Rated” then “Worst Rated” comments…
If it wasn’t so predictable it’d be heartbreaking
I love this one:
“I like Cameron him & Osborne will ensure the tories are slaughtered at the next election.”
The other main parties being diametrically opposed to this policy, I suppose – doh!
This one’s even better:
“IDIOT – Can’t he see this will raise immigration by this means!!”
Faultless logic – obviously posted by Nigel Farage!
Here you go, matey! Enjoy! :D http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2244560/Churches-hold-gay-weddings-David-Cameron-argues-sex-couples-equal-rights.html
lol – funny how many bigots clearly Never actually read the story!!
Go to their readers relies and downgrade their bigoted green arrows with a red one. I’ve done so. Great fun to see their bigoted votes neutralized. (I also suspect followers of C4M are doing the same by bumping up the bigots’ scores).
Turns out you can leave some comments yourself, so have spread a little liberty, logic and love to those who need it. Quite proud of myself. Hurrah.
We are NOT the USA, our courts CANNOT say that a law is unlawful. They can however state that they believe it is incompatible with the Convention on Human Rights – However the European Court has reminded us time and time again that GAYS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO THIS RIGHT UNLESS THE COUNTRY WANTS THEM TO HAVE IT.
Another twat MP who doesn’t understand the very law he is meant to be implementing – where do they get these idiots from?
Cameron is about to receive a lot of wailing emails and letters from the C4M lot.
If you want to write in support his stance (or not. if you’re against: unlike C4M, we don’t tell you how to think) why not use the Number 10 link below:
Sent: I am delighted that the Prime Minister has given his support to full marriage equality, including the right to have same-sex religious weddings recognised, where the religion consents.
This is a wonderful step forward for the UK and will help to promote equality and to attract the brightest talents from around the world, regardless of sexuality.
I hope the legislation will also end the current unfairness of forced divorce before trans people can obtain a GRA.
I look forward to swift introduction of this legislation.
That means he will get about four emails from C4M.
Where is the draft legislation Cameron?
Why are will still waiting for this?
It begins its way through the parliamentary process next week.
The Lords will certainly try to massacre it and may even be successful with so many evil bishops and Tory dinosaurs in there. We must carry on lobbying.
Quite. Get the bishops out of the Lords. Church and state should be separated and it’s ridiculous that in the 21st century we haven’t disestablished the Church of England.
On the Mail site comments range from:
Made up statistics…..
Why was this not in your manifesto? Because you would not have got elected. if you had concentrated on miniscule issues. 99% of the country do not want it. Stop bowing to stonewall bullyng tactics.
- Dave, Manchester, 7/12/2012 13:11
“There are more important things to worry about” bigots….
The UK is wholly bankrupt and all CaMoron can do is push this gay marriage nonsense down everyone’s throat.
- Reuben Camara, Morecambe, United Kingdom, 7/12/2012 13:00
Predictable Muslim bashing……
looking forward to this campaign demanding gay weddings in a mosque next.
- Davis Love, Newcastle, 7/12/2012 13:10
These miserable tossers should realise that equality it coming whether they like it or not,
Hmm. OK, I am disappointed. The Christian Institute/C4M (same people pretending to be two separate organisations) response is not nearly as much fun as I hoped.
Sure it’s nonsense, illogical and a pile of panicky lies. But they’ve obviously cottoned on to how their religious freedom cobblers has been counting against them.
Anyway, here’s Colin Hart (head honcho at C4M) quoting, er, Colin Hart (wearing his CI coms chat hat), on the site managed by, er, Colin Hart waffling on…
Colin Hart, Campaign Director of C4M, said: “The Government say they have a double lock for churches but in practice a double lock could become a double jeopardy.
“Churches could be embroiled in legal actions.
“The Government seems to have decided that it’s better for churches to be sued than for the Government to be sued in the European court.
“Surely they need to reconsider this rushed legislation which is jeopardising the freedoms of those who believe in traditional marriage.”
I have said it before – Despite all of this hate and vitriol being spewed out over the media at us by right-wing religious fanatics (Christians, Catholics, Muslims and Jews), I’m actually starting to feel sorry for them.
Their hate filled minds must be a truly terrifying place to live and to have their hypocritical life view challenged by love and compassion from the people they hate, must be a very scary thing.
We cannot, however, tar entire religions by the actions of a rabid minority.
I suggest anyone who has been on the receiving end of their bigotry to show them true love and understanding. They are infected with a sad disease and should be treated as having such.
However my patience is running short.
They waiting to go to Heaven, just because they are to fearful to make the world a better place than their illusions will allow.
It means, that same-sex marriage bill will be announced by Mr. David Cameron and government, and not by The Queen?
Check out The LGF’s new campaign for equal marriage and take action now! http://www.lgf.org.uk/equal
Amongst all the hate-filled nonsense a beacon of common sense and logic:
“Religion by it’s very nature has foundations laid down that believe marriage is a union between man and woman and should be allowed to say who they marry and who they don’t.” – Sharon, Longfield ————————– Utter nonsense… no-one cares about these backwards stone age beliefs… this country has already changed the traditions of marriage…. think of when the CofE was created by Henry VIII so he can get a divorce, that is also against your religion. People like you think they can pick and chose parts of their religion that they do agree with, and the parts that you don’t agree with, you completely ignore or have an excuse ready not to follow by them. Hypocrites.
- Paul , Manc, United Kingdom, 07/12/2012 14:17
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
But currently 17 in the red. Says a lot about the arseholes that go on that site. Illogical And self-righteous morons who have no right to take the moral high ground.
Having read the comments section of the Telegraph on this, I suspect this announcement will cause some of its readers to expire from apoplexy. Their ‘moral’ outrage will probably kill off more people than the winter flu.
The Telegraph shouldn’t run stories like this – they can’t afford to lose so many readers.
Good as You, David. This will be true Equality, a very brave man, Thank You so much !
I have never voted conservative, and I can’t imagine that I ever will. I disagree with their economic policies, social policies, and almost every other policy. Those that do well in the tory party (think Cameron, Osborne, Boris) are posh toffs, and have nothing in common with the Britain that I know.
The tory party is the natural home of homophobes, and it is no surprise that 100+ tory MPs will likely vote against marriage equality. But we should note that not all tories are homophobes. In particular, I have no reason to think that Cameron is homophobic. Rather than vilifying all tories we should encouraging them and giving them the ammunition that they need to stand up to the homophobes in their party.
Our aim should be to get to a position where there is no natural home for homophobes. When questions of GLBT equality arise, all the major parties should naturally and instinctively vote for equality.
That’s why I have posted the following on email.number10.gov.uk
Dear Mr. Cameron,
I applaud your stand on equal marriage, and in particular your decision to allow mosques, synagogues, churches and temples to solemnise same-sex marriages if they choose to. This move will certainly help the UK to maintain its 300-year old position as a leader in human rights. In turn, this will attract the brightest, most talented and the most fair-mined to Britain.
While I must reserve at least some of my judgement until the Bill is published, I am certainly very encouraged by your remarks today. I trust that will ensure that legislation is given priority, as fair treatment and equal rights is always a priority.
I am writing a similar message now myself!
my grandads peter and michael will be able to get married. hooray ! chloe aged 5 xxx
David Cameron is a hero. He is forging ahead with this measure of equality despite overwhelming anti-gay pressures from sections of the religious communities and from sections of his own party.
The toothless bigots’ backlash is becoming increasingly desperate. Today’s Telegraph article has the most biased reader poll I have ever seen. The comments section under the article is also a gallery of shameful bigotry.
I am sure the DT comments sections attract supporters of fascist ideology. Yesterday the DT had to close its comments under an article exposing appalling racism in Holland. As socially conservative as the DT may be, many posters are definitely not standard DT readers.
Indeed. I was fuming at the comments posted under an article about women in their 40s having children; it was the most backward, chauvinistic, sexist twaddle you’ve ever read; the old boys network was blaming older mothers for everything from increases in taxes to the rise of immigration; I kid you not. The misogyny was unrelenting and gleeful. I dare not read what the pointless DT wasters are saying about gay ppl getting married; my head will explode with expletives.
Unfortunately Cameron favours the reduction of benefits for the sick, the poor, the disabled, and the unemployed at a time when basic inflation in food, rent, bus fairs, and fuel is raging. He is an evil man.
I agree and I say that as someone who once voted Tory. Under Cameron,
the Tories have shown their true face as the true ‘nasty party’. Unless and until they change their bigoted attitudes towards the poor in general, the disabled and the unemployed in particular they will attract that label. I suspect this move on Cameron’s part is an attempt to get rid of the ‘nasty party’ label but it won’t succeed as it is their attitude to the poor that earns them that title.
Stewart Jackson is wrong. LGBTory, Chairman Matthew Sephton said: “The fact is that same-sex marriage was explicitly mentioned in the Conservative Party’s 2010 manifesto documents and the Conservatives were the only one of the main three Parties to include it. The move towards same-sex civil marriage is being led by a Conservative Prime Minister and we will be working with him at all stages to ensure his wish to see this on the statute books by 2015 is realised.”
He needs to check the facts. No party has a majority in the Lords and I suspect equal marriage will pass but with a very small majority, similar to the CP vote.
Jackson is wrong again. Cameron could invoke the Parliament Act since the 2010 manifesto included equal marriage.
What I don’t understand is why they (CI, C4M etc) think that a church would lose at the ECHR when there’s no such case against Denmark Sweden The Netherlands Belgium or Spain and no case has been taken against any church not allowing women to be priests or bishops.
I know that there’s hardly any logic in their positions, but am I missing something?
No, you’re not missing much.
But you are trying to understand a religious viewpoint based on logic. But there is no logic in their position. Religous belief is just that — belief. Their position is not fact-based, or logical, it is simply a belief.
Logic and religion are incompatible. Just as you (I assume) can’t be convinced by arguments such as “because the bible/torah/quran says so”, believers aren’t convinced by your fact-based logic.
Legally, it is easier for the government to allow Churches to opt out of performing same-sex marriages than to introduce an outright ban on church same-sex marriages.
For example, were an outright legal ban to be introduced this could be easily challenged in the Human Rights Courts as everyone has the right to Religious Freedoms.
Thus allowing same-sex couples who are part of a church who approves of same-sex marriage, eg, Quakers to quite rightly challenge the ban as being an opposition to the right to practice freely as a Quaker
However, on the other hand if you’re part of a church that doesn’t allow gay marriage, you cannot make the same legal challenge as the Quakers as your Church has the right to religious freedoms which include not recognising your same-sex marriage.
Given the expensive top-notch legal advise that the COE and Catholic Church avail of, they know this is true.
Yet they continue to claim that there will be legal challenges against them, which there cannot be.
Oh, the usual anti-clan was out too, frothing at the mouth. No doubt the usual Equal Marriage will lead to… locusts, world ending, tsunami, big earthquake, bestality, ~~~ etc etc etc…. chants were spoken… Not least, the most vocal seems to be Anne Widdecombe… Well, let me tell you dearie, change is coming, so get used to it.
Why can’t you stop frothing and just let the change happen, see what occurs… If you don’t like it, just ignore it.
Get used to change, because change will occur.
If I want to marry my partner in a church, I will, and bull ‘ooks to the fact you don’t like it! Tough. I will do as I wish. You cannot tell me where and when I can get married. Hetero couples have had the exclusive right for too long. Why not share this out eh? It’s not some frickin club where only those who meet entrance criteria are allowed to be a member.
“Gay marriage bill will be massacred in the Lords and govt can’t use Parliament Act as it wasn’t in manifesto. ”
So he accepts that the a SSM bill will fly throw an elected, democratic house of commons and yet an unelected, undemocratic body like the HoL has legitimacy in trying to stop it. No-one in the country has given any mandate to the HoL or to the CofE or the Catholic church to try to stop this but we have all elected the house of commons to get this bill thru now!
I am sad that Cameron said this.
It will polarise the country who were willing to accept equal (gay marriage until it was their church. Now that is a new ball game.
Far from it.
Why should LGBT people who are members of progressive, forward-thinking inclusive religions such as the Quakers be denied marriage in their own church just because the Catholic Church, or Church of England or Muslim and Jewish faiths deny their parishioners the same rights?
Article 9 of the Human Rights Act makes it very clear that we all have rights to Religious Freedoms. The Main stream churches, much as they protest now about potential legal challenges against them, have successfully used Article 9 to ensure that they can practise their faith regardless of who they discriminate against.
What David Cameron is now proposing is to allow these anti-equality churchs/religions to continue in the dark ages as their doing, but recognise and legally empower those churches/religions that welcome LGBT people to join their faith, and treat LGBT people’s loving relationships as on a par with their heterosexual members.
This is a good thing.