Reader comments · David Cameron: We haven’t made it clear enough that churches won’t be forced to marry gay couples · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


David Cameron: We haven’t made it clear enough that churches won’t be forced to marry gay couples

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. I actually think that they have been very vocal insisting the churches etc won’t have to hold same sex marriages.

    It is the religious lot are sat there with their hands over their ears screaming “we’re not listening”

    1. Paul Brownsey 7 Jan 2013, 12:21pm

      They pretend they think they will be forced to marry gays because really they want the law to force their religious views on everyone and to forbid even civil gay marriage. They mask this imperialist intent behind bland-seeming phrases like “our religious witness” and “the Christian contribution to public life”.

      1. They’ve lost the plot and are flailing around, drowning in a sea of their own bile. Leave them to drown, I say. Ban them from holding gay marriages and they’ll become increasingly both marginalised and regarded as nut jobs.

  2. That There Other David 7 Jan 2013, 11:45am

    Don’t be so charitable Mr. Cameron. The Government has been extremely clear about its plans, it’s just that those who are against marriage equality are deliberately choosing to pretend otherwise.

    Just as they deliberately choose to pretend that we don’t really exist, or that we don’t really deserve to be treated as full human beings.

    1. Nonsense. Within a month of introducing civil gay marriages some attention seeking couple will try to use the Equalities Act or EU law to force a CoE parish church to hold a same-sex wedding.

      Devise credible protections for churches etc and we can move forward.

      1. That There Other David 8 Jan 2013, 8:48am

        The protections are already there. Read the proposed legislation.

        Any “attention seeking couple” who meet your prediction will have their case thrown out. Completely.

        So what exactly are you moaning about? That B&B owners can’t throw gay couples out on their ear perhaps?

  3. Cardinal Fang 7 Jan 2013, 12:05pm

    I agree with the above 2 posts. The government has been very clear about this, the PM is being very polite to the other side.

    I’m not sure though that he grasps that the supposed religious objection to “being forced to conduct weddings against their will” is just a smokescreen for public sympathy. The “religious conservatives” are also very clear – they object to all same sex marriages, civil or religious, as a matter of principal, and they are conducting a quite nasty worldwide propaganda war against gay people – just look at the so-called Christmas messages of certain clerics and the pontiff.

    Claiming that they will be forced to marry us is just part of that propaganda, and to portray the persecutor as victim.

  4. Actually, Cameron has made it abundantly clear. Everyone has made it abundantly clear, over and over

    It doesn’t matter because the bigots are lying. They’re clinging to this lie because it’s one of the few ways they can try and justify their bigotry. No matter how clear you are about this law – and there’s really no way you can be clearer – the bigots will lie and the press will give them an unchallenged platform from which to do so.

    It’s not about truth or clarity or information – it’s about them doing anything they can to stop our rights

  5. He should stop talking about it and just get on with it. You can’t please everyone.

  6. Robert in S. Kensington 7 Jan 2013, 12:55pm

    From the day the consultation began, the government were very clear that no religious denomination would be forced to participate. Cameron and his cabinet have made it more than transparent.

    The only failing is that he and others allowed the bigots to run roughshod in the media, distorting the facts and the truth went unchallenged. Had that happened, a lot of the hysteria might have abated. He’s being far too deferential to bigots which is what they are, lets face it.

    Since the quadruple lock announcement, I’ve noticed a rather welcome but deafening silence by the CoE. I don’t think it was quite prepared for such a drastic measure, but warranted of course to shut them up.

    I fail to see why they feel they should have been consulted before the announcement. If they cared so much about their exemptions and protections, they should have requested a meeting with the PM, but they didn’t. Too late, get over it. Now on to equal marriage!

  7. Robert in S. Kensington 7 Jan 2013, 1:00pm

    Another thing, I’m not convinced that Tories and others in opposition to equal marriage genuinely support civil partnerships. It’s nothing more than convenient ruse and a very useful tool to justify not voting for equal marriage. They pretend they support them but they really don’t. If they had their way CPs wouldn’t even exist either. Goes to show what a bunch of lying tossers they are, but then that’s nothing new for a lot of so called ‘christian’ bigots.

    I often wonder what their reaction would have been had CPs not existed. I’ve no doubt they would still be oppposed but their argument against equal marriage would have been a lot more difficult I think.

  8. It’s not that you’re not loud enough, Dave, it’s just that those who you’re trying to talk to just don’t want to listen. And they never will if it goes against their own views.

  9. George Forth 7 Jan 2013, 1:27pm

    He hasn’t made it clear? To whom? Ostriches? Dead people? Earthworms? I’d say any living creature with it’s head above ground and within spitting distance of the British Isles got it loud and clear.

    A lot of people don’t *want* to get it. But that’s something else. Altogether.

    1. He’s made his intentions clear. He hasn’t explained how it will actually work. The whole gay marriage bandwagon is based on a sentimental view of marriage. Most couples today might get married because they are “in love” but the legal definition of marriage is based on more than romance.

  10. “We haven’t made it clear enough that churches won’t be forced to marry gay couples”

    Yes you have, but you CANNOT compromise with religion. NOTHING you can say will bring them round, we just have to wait for them to grow old and die. Sad but true.

    1. Well said. Religion has demanded the right not to perform gay marriage. Cameron has gone even further to appease them and will enshrine in law their right not to. Ahhh. But now, they’re panicking. Suddenly, they realise they’ll become increasingly marginalised. What a complete shower. The church and their Daily Mail reading congregation are on a downward spiral. They’ve refused to keep up with the rest of society and are consequently doomed. Good, I say!

  11. How can they when the papers are full of crap from the C4M and the Daily Mail, church of England, Vatican, Pope etc on a daily basis

  12. F¥<king Hell. He couldn't have made it clearer if he phoned everyone in the country personally! As the religions are the main ones kicking up a fuss, the assurances are given out ad nauseam every f¥<king day! They haven't got any better reason to oppose. LOL

  13. Craig Denney 7 Jan 2013, 2:36pm

    “which we will introduce early next year”

    What happened to early this year?

    1. Jon "maddog" Hall 7 Jan 2013, 3:30pm


      The quote “which we will introduce early next year” came from “proposals outlined by the Minister for Equalities, Maria Miller last year.”, so she was really talking about “early this year”.

  14. Jock S. Trap 7 Jan 2013, 2:43pm

    The government can keep reminding the Church they won’t but as per usual they’re not interested in listen only discriminating.

    Time to end the reminding and get on with the action. They know they won’t have to hold equal marriage, end of!!

  15. Of course they know they won’t be *forced*, this apparent anxiety is clearly just a ploy.

  16. Lyn Thomas 7 Jan 2013, 3:06pm

    Once and for all its not the Church of Wales – its the Church in Wales. Please make sure you get it right, its bad enough that government ministers make that error.

    Oh and the issue is absurd, religious marriage should be derecognised and only civil marriage recognised. Thus the churches will be free to do what they like.

    1. Which means CPs for all.

      Unless you care to explain what kind of non-magical difference the word “marriage” makes to peoples lives?

  17. Yes, you have, Dave. They’re just sticking their fingers in their ears and going “Na na na – i can’t hear you.”

    Oh, except when Maria Miller mentioned the quadruple lock when suddenly they started bitching about how unfair that was – after whinging that the previously suggested locks weren’t enough.

    You might as well reason with a potato. They won’t stop moaning whatever you do or say. Ignore them now – you’ve done more than enough.

  18. Haven’t we gone far enough in trying to appease religions? After all, according to the latests census, they represent a mere 1 per cent of the population. In my book, NO-ONE should be allowed opt-outs from the law. Imagine if I wanted to be allowed to refuse to perform mixed-race marriages because they were ‘against my beliefs’. Yet, because these people profess ‘religious belief’, they may discriminate against us. Why? It’s pathetic and MUST end. I pay my taxes. I want equality under the law. Religions should be forced to respect that – particularly as they are non-taxpaying outfits. Belief is a choice. Ones sexuality is not.

  19. What?! The only thing the Government hasn’t done is cut the message in giant letters, Mount Rushmore-like, on the side on Snowdon! If the religious claim not to know they are simply lying. And besides, why they don’t they just have a bit of ‘faith’?

  20. Mike Homfray 7 Jan 2013, 5:33pm

    The churches just aren’t listening. Nothing new there

  21. But you should be forcing the churches to obey the law, Plasticine Dave. You should be making them treat everyone equally, whether they want to do it themselves or not.

    You make the shops and the employers and the schools and the civil service and the military and everyone else obey the law. None of them gets a special “conscientious bigotry” get-out clause. Why do churches deserve one? They’re not special, they’re just self-constituted minority-interest hobby groups – nothing more or less than a scrabble club or a Harry Potter fan club.

    Just because they claim to have access to special supernatural truths, that doesn’t make them special; It makes them deluded. We absolutely should not be granting people exemptions from the law based on personal delusions of self-congratulatory imagined importance.

  22. gil rossini 7 Jan 2013, 7:32pm

    And I would like to make it absolutely clear that DC will never bribe me with what is my absolute right (to marry whoever I want to), to vote Tory. I guess that plenty of LGBTQI people will feel the same. Still supporting marriage equality, DC???

  23. Dominick J. 7 Jan 2013, 10:19pm

    This has been said OVER and OVER and STILL the Creeps and haters are still trying to scare others into thinking differently. I’m tired of trying to reassure them. SO I say Let the idiots think what they want.

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.