Germany will be the next link in the chain IMO. Get equal marriage there and it will become EU-wide before much longer. They’ll be too much external pressure on the likes of Italy for them to be able to ignore it.
I think so too, but first, Angela Merkel needs to go, taking her CDU party with her. Her popularity is already waning. Germany’s entry into equal marriage would be the most significant in the EU, the economic engine of Europe. The implications and it’s influence would be huge for the rest of the EU.
Next will most likely be Luxembourg. I also think Finland will beat Germany.
I’ve read this twice and still completely fail to understand the link you’re trying to make between equal marriage and the EU. Bizarre
Adrian – Simply making a case for Europe would have been stronger, or did you have to link it to an LGBT rights issue to get it on PinkNews?
Also, please learn how to use colons :( The grammar is a bit all over the place.
It is strange, but there might still be a bit of a correlation amongst Tories between views on Europe and views on LGBT equality. There certainly was a correlation 20 years ago – I remember when we were campaigning for an equal age of consent at the end of 1993, Stonewall noting that Tory MPs who were more pro-European were more likely to support an equal age of consent.
The link is those who would vote and those who wouldn’t. Adrian is explaining that in each of the parties you would the same amount of dissenters if there was a vote on EU membership.
The freedom to live free from discrimination purely on the basis of ones natural and intrinsic sexual orientation seems to me to be very different from the freedom to exercise the lifestyle choice of swanning around Europe.
Equating these fundamentally different ‘rights’ is what gives politicians of all hues permission to treat equality like an à la carte menu.
It’s a dangerous construct. Liberals of all people should understand the differences.
As we have learned from Sarah Teather and the like, ‘Liberal’ on the label doesn’t mean liberal inside.
This article is interesting but unpersuasive.
Perhaps some people reach their views on the EU and on marriage as a result of a smug sense of natural superiority. Some people do take privilege for granted, lacking insight into the sufferings of others.
But overall I think this argument is both offensive and wrong. Offensive because, as others have said, marriage is a fundamental human right, unlike international trade agreements.
And wrong. Back in the day, Eurosceptics and social conservatives were often overlapping groups, I think, because both shared a nostalgic view of the past, in which men were men and Britain was great.
But today’s Eurosceptics are suspicious of the EU for a wide range of reasons, including corruption, waste, and democratic deficit. And if the LibDems hope to keep the UK in the EU, they are going to need much better arguments than this.
The new movement for tolerance and equality with regards to the redefinition of marriage – which seeks to overthrow bigotry and intolerance – is creating and exactly what it seeks to eradicate. BIGOTRY AND INTOLERANCE! I have never seen so much intolerance and bigotry before than that of the people who call for it in todays society. I thought people who called for this just wanted “people to be allowed to be themselves”… well, let this be consistent across the board and you will have problems.
Rather blanket statement, L, with no specifics or data. Care to share with us how you think people supporting marriage equality are bigoted and intolerant?
If you’re going to trot out the NOM/C4M chestnut that we won’t accept religious people discriminating against us in areas of public accommodation, bring it on.
You are working from the premise that we’re all equal already. WE ARE NOT. Would you have made the same ridiculous comments to Emeline Pankhurst or Matin Luther King? All attempts to win concessions from the majority stance will result in some hightened levels of anger, don’t you agree …?
So are you implying that opponents of equal marriage, especially those of a religious bent aren’t intolerant when they allude to polygamy, incest, bestiality if two people of the same gender marry? Would you say that people like Sir Roger Gale, who has divorced twice and now on his third marriage (still counting) or Tory MP Bob Blackman who had an eleven year adulterous affair, or Tory MP Nadine Dorries having committed adultery aren’t bigoted by opposing gay couples from having a civil marriage while espousing the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman or more if you happen to be heterosexual as was the case with the three I’ve already mentioned? Their not intolerant either? Why aren’t you addressing that first?
..They’re not intolerant either?
Without the European court of human rights we would not have age of consent at 16 and the ECHR overturned the ban on gays serving in the armed forces. They don’t just support us here but gays all over Europe.
So is leaving Europe such a good idea after all?
I like Adrian grew up in a Tory hoursehold and even voted Selfservative. When Thatcher came to her throne my views were changed. When Clause 28 came about, I became more and more Liberal.
I agree with Adrian regards to Europe.