Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

UK: 86 MPs vote to change the Equality Act in same-sex marriage amendment debate

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. No, people are NOT entitled to protection when being homophobic “when they are teaching in the classroom.”

    Seriously, who elects idiots like this?

    1. If you said to someone “Shut your eyes. Now, imagine a forest. OK. Now, a bird. OK, and now a puffed-up Tory knuckle-dragger of the worst sort.” this guy is exactly what they’d imagine for the third object.

      Anyway, judging by the vibrant glow of his nose, the good book is not his only source of comfort

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 30 Jan 2013, 2:47pm

      Who elects idiots like him? Why, catholics and other similar minded idiots of course.

  2. DivusAntinous 30 Jan 2013, 12:07pm

    They are entitled to protection? Protection from what?

    Why is it so important that we ensure nobody is offended? In the words of Stephen Fry… So f****** what?!

  3. That There Other David 30 Jan 2013, 12:12pm

    Nope. Individuals, companies, and corporate entities do NOT get exemptions from equality laws.

    And Edward Leigh is an arse of the highest order.

  4. Is a white supremacist entitled to their belief that a mixed race marriage is invalid? Is a Catholic entitled to believe that that a non-Catholic marriage is invalid, or that a Catholic who gets divorced and remarried is not truly divorced so that second marriage is invalid? The answer is, of course, yes. They are entitled to their belief. The same is true of people who don’t consider same sex marriage valid. That has no bearing on whether same sex, mixed race, non-Catholic or divorced-Catholic marriages can take place or be recognised in the law. This is an attempt at stalling to sabotage the process. Typical dirty tricks from people who know that they have no real argument.

  5. bobbleobble 30 Jan 2013, 12:19pm

    They already have protection, the Employment Tribunal in the case of the guy who was demoted by Trafford Council found in his favour. The Courts will protect people who disagree with same sex marriage.

    Plus the idea of changing the Equalities Act to provide protection for homophobia is totally anathema.

  6. ...Paddyswurds 30 Jan 2013, 12:28pm

    This bullshyte about special protection for religious special interest groups and individuals is starting to look like dictatorship masquerading as democracy. When a proposal is made by an MP and it makes its way through both places inevitably someone or group will loose. Until now that was it you lost thats Democracy. For religion there has to be “special protection” From whom, one wonders?: or is this just another form of homophobia by stealth. Edward Leigh has always homophobically opposed Gay rights and won’t ever change and is a theist of the RC persuasion so you can just imagine the bigotry from “the Viscount” straight from the big house aristocracy Shouldn’t there be “special protection” for Gay people against such people?

    1. ...Paddyswurds 30 Jan 2013, 12:30pm

      lose **

    2. That There Other David 30 Jan 2013, 12:36pm

      Indeed. If anyone were to lobby to change the Equality Act and allow British people to openly discriminate against Roman Catholics they’d wail all the way from here to Lourdes and back. Yet they’ll happily try and do that against other groups.

      The world needs protecting from The Vatican. The brainwashing has to end.

    3. Oh dear Paddy, bigotry against gays, and special protection needed for gays, Oh dear that’s just so terrible, you gays have such a hard life.
      Why don’t you stop whinging and just get on with your life?
      In fact adopt the same attitude you have for trans people, whom you think need no protection and suffer no bigotry??

  7. No, no further capitulation with these evil god-botherers. No further ‘conscience’ clauses.

    He’s the one who tried to scupper Civil Partnerships with an amendment to include brothers and sisters.

    He had got his homophobic buddies in to the chamber yesterday, but when it comes to the full vote he’s gonna get his arse whipped.

    As for religion, it should be pushed out of the public space back in to where it belongs, inside churches and mosques, with no right to make derogatory demonising harmful statements in public. We have to rid society of the evil of religion. They are a danger to children and young people who are gay – they are the primary cause of youth suicide because of the homophobia they inject in to society. We must shut them out, right out, permanently.

    1. ...Paddyswurds 30 Jan 2013, 12:34pm

      Read your comment and was nodding vigorously in agreement and then I noticed your Tag… who knew?

  8. Please can I have a right, enshrined in law, not to recognise any marriage performed in church, both in my professional and public life?

  9. Mumbo Jumbo 30 Jan 2013, 12:38pm

    ……The MP explained his bill would amend the Equality Act 2010 to include a person’s “conscientious beliefs” about the definition of marriage…..

    Conscience and religious belief are entirely different things.

  10. Bigotry is not something which should be supported with special ‘protections.’

    Ironically, thgis idiot is arguing that HIS ‘special interest group; be given ‘extra’ rights to the exclusion and detriment of others…exactly the same thing he claims GLBTQI people are trying, in his opinion, to do!

    Two faced? Yup!

  11. Great, this could be called the ‘Bigotry in Schools’ amendment. Schools used to be homophobic because the teachers weren’t allowed to talk about gay people, now it’ll be because religionists will be able to bang on about how ‘gay marriage’ is not real marriage. If the amendment passes, that is

  12. This law is not only a license for bigots but also a license to discriminate – it isn’t restricted to schools or religious buildings – how many suppliers could use this law to deny goods and services to gay weddings? Photographers, florists, venues, caterers, suit hire, dress makers, hotels and holiday destinations?

    Or even just denying service TO gay married couples. If they’re listing as refusing acknowledgement, respect or even dealing with gay couples who are married as something they can be discriminated against for

  13. Robert in S. Kensington 30 Jan 2013, 12:47pm

    Would he support an amendment to allow anti-catholic, anti-religious views in public, in the workplace, in the classroom, in the streets? It’s a double-edged sword, Edward Leigh. He should be extemely careful what he is wishing for. The man is a delusional fool and a hypocritical bigot and shouldn’t be in government using religion to promote his catholic agenda on the majority of the country who aren’t catholic and aren’t religious.

    I think a second look at the Catholic Emancipation Act would be in order. This foreign cult is getting out of control and trying to impose its will on a sovereign nation and its secular government.

  14. ...Paddyswurds 30 Jan 2013, 12:51pm

    Edward Leigh’s Amendment would in effect render the Equalities act unworkable and as a Lawyer Leigh well knows that. Every crackpot preacher and deluded fool could claim all sort under such a law and it ould make tthe UK practically ungovernable. Can You imagine Anti abortion nurses and Doctors, Animal Rights butchers, xtian B&B owners, Baptist Councilors, and on ad infinitum ….. or it to benefit christians only (lc intentional).. It would be a mess and it says something about the Homophobic Tory Party that 86 of their MPs voted for such an amendment…. ….

    1. 64 Conservative MPs voted for the amendment, along with 6 DUP, 1 Independent, 8 Labour and 7 Lib Dem MPs.

  15. ...Paddyswurds 30 Jan 2013, 12:53pm

    Edward Leigh’s Amendment would in effect render the Equalities act unworkable and as a Lawyer Leigh well knows that. Every crackpot preacher and deluded fool could claim all sort under such a law and it could make the UK practically ungovernable. Can you imagine? Anti abortion nurses and Doctors, Animal Rights butchers, xtian B&B owners, Baptist Councilors, and on ad infinitum ….. or it to benefit christians only (lc intentional).. It would be a mess and it says something about the Homophobic Tory Party that 86 of their MPs voted for such an amendment…. ….

    1. ...Paddyswurds 30 Jan 2013, 12:56pm

      is …. ? **

  16. Mr Leight isn’t just “anti equal marriage”

    He is staunchly anti-gay- and ALWAYS has been- over decades and decades and decades.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 30 Jan 2013, 2:46pm

      I had a very nasty email exchange when this cretin came out of the woodwork once the consultation was under way. He told me he is not homophobic and that he has gay friends of course and supports CPs, yet the Vatican has unequivocally stated that there should be no semblance of legal unions for gay couples. It vigorously opposes CPs which have suddenly become a very convenient tool to throw at equal marriage. Bloody hypocrites. Their excuses are getting thinner and more desperate by the day.

      1. ...Paddyswurds 30 Jan 2013, 3:20pm

        If he says he supports CPs he is a liar. He voted against it….

  17. Everyone is entitled to speak about their beliefs. But if a White Supremacist teacher wishes to pass on his beliefs to his class, should he be allowed to? No? Then they can’t spread their homophobia either.
    His amendment goes directly against the spirit of equality.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 30 Jan 2013, 4:08pm

      Absolutely right, but….nobody is going to challenge Leigh, certainly none from within his party are they? Nobody ever does. It’s all about being politically correct towards religious nutters who have carte blanche to say anything they want and there is always someone defending them, usually their own kind in Parliament or in the media. If we proffer negative, even vile comments about them and their beliefs then they raise the abuse of religious freedom card and we come off as the villains and accused of having it both ways. I’ve seen it many times in the Daily Mail and Telegraph.

  18. Spanner1960 30 Jan 2013, 2:11pm

    I seem to remember that at one time if you were to criticise the church or it’s beliefs you could be arrested, imprisoned or even executed. Some of these laws have technically never been repealed. It is called blasphemy.

    I find it ironic that this thing has now turned full circle, and they want laws to protect them from criticising others.

    1. GulliverUK 30 Jan 2013, 2:49pm

      “On 5 March 2008, an amendment was passed to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 which abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel in England and Wales. (Common law is abolished, not repealed.) The Act received royal assent on 8 May 2008,[76][77] and the relevant section came into force on 8 July 2008.”
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#United_Kingdom

      If you are in England or Wales – say what you like about these illogical irrational loonies. I’m in full-on militant atheist mode since yesterday. :)

      ps. I’m assuming Scotland abolished it also?

  19. Hi all, if you have a moment check out the link below, the comments at the bottom give a very good insight in to the views (of both sides) on this subject. Incidentally I once received an award from Edward Leigh when I was five for dressing like Popeye, I will be returning the photo and certificate in disgust…maybe this was why my sister did not win for her Boy George costume….?
    http://cornerstone-group.org.uk/2011/02/17/statement-by-edward-leigh/

  20. Edward Leigh really is just the nastiest little tory thug on Earth….

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all