Reader comments · Backbench Tory MPs speak out against ‘outrageous’ marriage equality plans · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Backbench Tory MPs speak out against ‘outrageous’ marriage equality plans

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. What utter rubbish!

    Where is his proof? He can’t prove them I suspect as he knows these claims are not based on fact.

  2. That There Other David 11 Dec 2012, 4:17pm

    98%??!!?? HAHAHAHAHA!!

    He doesn’t actually believe that does he? What a complete and utter loon!!

  3. this one just happens to be less objectionable but cameron’s got about as much mandate for this as he had for dismantling the nhs – talk about a sense of entitlement

  4. Robert in S. Kensington 11 Dec 2012, 4:27pm

    Was it in the manifesto or not? I keep hearing different opinions, some say yes, some say no. If these people such as Dr. Sharan James keep insisting that it wasn’t, then someone in goverment needs to clarify it.

    Pawsey needs to provide the evidence when he says there’s a link between declining marriage rates and introducing equal marriage? As for Spain and Holland, again, he needs to come forward with a report from both governments reiterating what he claims. I think he’ll have a long wait.

    Further, the state of Massachusetts in America where equal marriage was first introduced in that country reported a rise in the number of heterosexual marriages after the fact. He’s spewing the same garbage that Tory MP Craig Whittaker was banging on about during the consultation.

    They’re like children who can’t get their way. They need to grow up, act their age and stop the nonsensical temper tantrums.

    Just watch as more absurd statements come forth.

    1. The Conservatives issued a “Contract for Equalities” before the election. This Conservatives put all their promises to us in there, including the promise to “consider the case” for equal marriage. That way they could tell us that it was “an electoral promise” but their traditional voters wouldn’t read it.

      Since a manifesto is not a legal document, just a political convention, it’s a matter of opinion whether this “Contract” should be seen as part of the manifesto under a separate cover. The sense of it (a set of electoral promises) is the same, but many voters will not have read it.

      Expect more situations like this in future: the public wants ever-shorter documents, while social media etc. mean parties are called upon to state positions on ever-greater numbers of issues. The result is increasing numbers of ancillary documents.

      Maria Miller made this fairly clear in Parliament today, but those raising this point seemed uninterested in the answer.

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 11 Dec 2012, 5:10pm

        Thanks for clarifying.

    2. That There Other David 11 Dec 2012, 9:44pm

      There is no link between marriage equality and falling marriage rates. Marriage rates have been falling across Europe for the past 50 years, mostly driven by increasing opportunities for women. By carefully selecting the period of study he can pretend there is a link, but it’s nonsense.

      The sad thing is I don’t believe he actually realises he’s regurgitating utter bilge. Someone from a so-called Christian lobbying group has told him that and he’s never properly studied the figures before repeating the errant conclusion. It’s just a shame that so many of the British population are also unaware that he’s actually making himself look a complete idiot.

    3. It was in there, page 14, top right-hand side.

      But on that subject, was privatising and whole-sale reorganisation in the manifesto ? Not only was it not, the Tories explicitly said they would not have root and branch reforms of the NHS.

      They also never mentioned they were going to spy on every email, text, voice call, etc., in fact they said they were the answer to the snooping Labour government, and would protect peoples privacy.

      The LibDems pledged not to raise student fees, but tripled them.

      As you know …. I could go on until I run out of line length !! :D

  5. Trying to think of a reply that won’t get me banned from here.

    What a bunch of ******* *****! It just proves that any ******* ***-hole can get a seat in parliament.

    Oh, well, **** them!

  6. Same sex marriage causes climate change! Scientists the world over agree that the climate is changing – and countries the world over are introducing same sex marriage and other forms of equality for gay people. Coincidence? I think not! Probably responsible for whales and dolphins beaching themselves too.

    1. Ironically this is the exact same logic that’s used to link atmospheric carbon levels to the cyclic climate of the planet – no causal link has ever been found.

    2. I thought that people stopped getting married because of the MP’s expenses scandal.

      1. That There Other David 11 Dec 2012, 9:45pm

        I blame those Simon Cowell shows. They’ve been on for the same period of study, and look what’s happened to marriage rates.

        Doom I tell thee. DOOOM!!

  7. Sister Mary Clarence 11 Dec 2012, 4:48pm

    I think the key thing about this article is the word ‘backbench’

    Perhaps Mark would like to tell us why his career has never taken him past backbench to frontbench.

    I wonder if he thinks this little rant will engender any change in his bench status?

    My money is on ‘backbench’ very soon becoming ‘no bench’.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 11 Dec 2012, 5:11pm

      I second that!

  8. Dave North 11 Dec 2012, 5:06pm

    You know.

    I’m really not feeling as if I belong to this UK society.

    They really do hate us.

    Perhaps if we can withhold all taxes, after all no taxation without representation.

    Filthy Tory scum.

    1. Some of them certainly are, some of them are supporting this, including many veteran Tories, including John Major. We mustn’t imagine they are ALL homophobic bigots just because there are a small fringe freaky group of loud-mouthed yobs making hysterical rants and saying things which prove their own deeply-flawed personality. We should almost feed sorry for them, it must be hell to live a life where you hate everybody and everything, no joy in that at all.

      We are every bit a part of society, even if a few horrible disgusting people make us sometimes feel like we aren’t. The fact that they’ve wormed their slimy way in to parliament and have power over our destiny is unfortunate, if they had not we would pay no attention to what they say.

    2. de Villiers 12 Dec 2012, 7:50am

      Don’t upset yourself over relics. The noise is a sign of their impotence. Such people have never made me feel as if I am not a part of society.

  9. Robert in S. Kensington 11 Dec 2012, 5:09pm

    What an idiot. Marriage has been declining since before CPs were introduced. Where do these tossers get their information from I wonder?

    Pawsey’s face has bigot written all over it because that’s just what this is all about. Spurious statements with no foundation. He needs to come forward with the evidence a bit sharpish. In fact, all of them do. Not even Colin Hart can and he lost even with a bigger list of signatories in his petition. What does that say about their credibility with the British public?

  10. The backbencher who disappointed me was Simon Hughes.

    I’ve always said Mr Hughes should be forgiven for the dreadful treatment of Peter Tatchell in Bermondsey in 1983, for which he has apologised.

    But to hear him today insisting that equal marriage “wasn’t in the manifesto” and that the govt needed to clarify the difference between civil and religious marriage was nauseating.

    I won’t get into the arguments on these points as I’ve done so too often already on PN.

    But does Mr Hughes really want to align himself with the demagoguery, mendaciousness and anti-intellectualism that has characterised the anti-gay lobby’s response?

    The govt has now understood the law on civil/religious marriage and is (at last!) being perfectly clear on the subject.

    If Mr Hughes cannot follow the argument, he should keep quiet. And if he understands, but wants to defend the right of his constituents to hold bigoted opinions, he shouldn’t ask the govt to waste time repeating itself.

    1. I am equally disappointed in Simon Hughes too. He is my MP and he certainly did not speak for me in parliament yesterday.

      I will remember this come the next general election and I will also be contacting him to see why he made the comments that he did.

  11. So glad to be put right on this. Straight reluctance to tie the knot plus incur all the expense involved on both sides of the pond during a spectacular recession is all really the fault of queers getting hitched.
    Of course it is. Isn’t everything our fault?

    1. Well, we can apparently cause hurricanes too, so really, they should be careful. for the wrath of the gays will once again be unleashed if we don’t get our way! ;-)

  12. As a tax payer I am contributing to pay the wages of this guy who is fighting tooth and nail to deny me equality and civil rights?

    In his next breath I wonder if he will complain that this is taking to long and distracting the government from the economy, completely ignoring his part in prolonging the debate?

  13. I would like to take this opportunity to apologize for the conduct of my local MP, Mr Stewart Jackson of Peterborough.

    His views are not those held by his constituents.

  14. What does the manifesto have to do with anything? Are these people seriously under the impression that the government has never introduced bills that weren’t mentioned in their manifesto before?

    Also, what is this Sharon James woman a doctor of? Divinity, I’m guessing?

  15. Sadly, still too many examples of this sort of behaviour from the ‘nasty party’.

  16. Hahahaha! Marriage equality here we come. Hahahaha!

  17. fume, froth, splutter…spill the port….

  18. “a constitutional outrage, and a disgrace. There is no electoral mandate for these…” I had to read the whole paragraph again, thinking that Jackson had started talking about the bishops in the House of Lords. Silly me, eh?

  19. I’m sure he’s a big David Icke fan :D

    Also probably thinks the twin towers was an inside job.

  20. friday jones 11 Dec 2012, 11:17pm

    Oh, Mr. Pawsey, why can’t I quit you?

  21. Oh my dear Lord when will they realise nobody cares what they think
    When will they realise it’s down to the PEOPLE OF THE COUNTRY to decide what happens in THEIR OWN COUNTRY, not the decision of some moron with self-important views

    98% my backside

  22. …marriage rates in Spain and Holland collapsed after same-sex marriage was introduced there

    According to whom? Nothing I’ve heard suggests …

    Oh, you know what? I’m so bored with this endless round of overwrought opinion masquerading as fact that I can’t be bothered to react any more.

    1. de Villiers 12 Dec 2012, 10:39am

      It really is irritating when people who should know better throw around figures which have no causal relationship. Even though marriage rates did decline, this more likely due to the very real collapse of the economy with younger people living with their parents for longer and being unable to set up a home independently elsewhere; it is unlikely that people will get married when both partners each still live with their parents. It may also reflect an ageing population.

      The marriage rate in the EU declined from 7.9 per 1000 people in 1970 to 4.5 per 1000 people in 2010. In Spain, the figure declined from 5.4 per 1000 people in 2000 to 3.6 in 2010.

      Between 2000-2010 the rate of marriage dropped in Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, France, Italy, Cyprus, Hungary, Malta, the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Romania and Solvenia.

      It just shows that such people are casting around to try and find arguments that support their visceral beliefs.

  23. Ahhhh mate your just another slimy anemic little homophobe..

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.