Reader comments · House of Lords may stage an anti-equal marriage rebellion · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Daily Telegraph

House of Lords may stage an anti-equal marriage rebellion

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Sounds like a toddler’s temper tantrum, if you ask me.

  2. davevauxhall 11 Feb 2013, 12:52pm

    The Telegraph with their daily campaign to quash marriage for gay people. There is nothing this paper won’t print to influence people against it.

  3. Soem person 11 Feb 2013, 12:55pm

    I kind of hope they do this. If they do, they will show how out of touch the Lords are with the rest fo the country, as shown by the overwhelming majority that was displayed in the commons. The sooner we reform the Lords, the better, and doing this will hasten that time.

  4. Robert in S. Kensington 11 Feb 2013, 12:59pm

    So C4M and their gang of bigoted hate mongers may get their wish after all, but then this is the Telegraph reporting. I hope they’re proved wrong. So bloody sickening. It’s taken away the euphoria over last weeks astounding victory in Parliament.. Now more than ever, I’m in full support of an elected upper chamber, throw these bigots out.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 11 Feb 2013, 1:13pm

      Interesting article. Let’s hope perhaps not turns out to be will not vote no. Again, its the Telegraph. They’ve been wrong on every point in the issue of equal marriage.

  5. Lord Stoddart is not a Labour peer. He got expelled. So I doubt Ed Miliband could care less what he thinks.

  6. Christopher Hobe Morrison 11 Feb 2013, 1:28pm

    So we will get closer and closer to the reform if not abolition of the House of Lords.

  7. Robert in S. Kensington 11 Feb 2013, 1:35pm

    Let’s hope then that Maria Miller will carry out plan B, invoking the Parliament Act. With such a resounding majority last week, I fail to see why it wouldn’t be used. The Lords defying such a huge majority would be extremely foolish and damaging to the upper chamber. Lord Stoddart’s words are parroting almost verbatim what C4M has been saying all along.

  8. Remember, though, these unelected fossils can only scupper the bill with the connivance of Parliament. They can be overridden if the Government believes the issue to be worth it. This rather than the parliamentary vote, will be the true test of Cameron & and the Tories; no-one expects anything better from the Lords, after all.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 11 Feb 2013, 3:04pm

      Well, 400-175 isn’t going to lend much if any connivance to scupper the bill I don’t think. They would be extremely foolish to send it back because of the Parliament Act. Sooner or later, it will pass with or without them. I can’t imagine the Tories would want this to be a huge election issue in 2015 which it will be if the Lords try to delay it. I suggest Labour start making more noise about Lords reform.

  9. Then they will just be underlining the need for reform. This is a system shared only by Iran and is just not appropriate for the “mother of parliaments”.

  10. Dennis Velco 11 Feb 2013, 3:06pm

    Let them do it and demonstrate their stance so they may be replaced to properly represent the tide of the country, the region and the world.

    Thanks for this article and your reporting. What you do is appreciated.

    I posted it to my LGBT Group on LinkedIn with over 18,000+ global members to spur members to read your article and to make comment. I also scooped it at Scoop.It on my LGBT Times news mashup.

    Link to group >>

    All LGBT+ and community allies…. please come join me and 18,000+ of your soon to be great connections on LinkedIn. The member base represents 80% of the world’s countries.

    It’s core value is – Visibility can lead to awareness which can lead to equality. Come stand with us and increase our visibility on the globe’s largest professional networking site. Be a professional who just happens to be LGBT – or a welcomed community ally.

  11. Sister Mary Clarence 11 Feb 2013, 3:48pm

    “I think I have a hell of a lot more of an idea that is going on in the country than he does”

    Yes, I’m sure you do, however I think that most of us can see that you don’t.

    Another nail in their coffin ….

  12. the House of Lords needs abolishing. These people represent and are accountable to no one but themselves.

  13. Completely predicted this. The House of Lords is full of even more bigoted old men than the Commons and is probably the biggest obstacle to getting the marriage equality bill passed.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 11 Feb 2013, 4:25pm

      I wouldn’t put too much faith n anything the Telegraph reports. Some were predicting failure in the Commons too, the ones at the Telegraph and Mail and C4M actually believed it wouldn’t pass claiming the majority were against it. Wrong again. I think this will pass but with a close margin. They can’t ignore 400-175 in the Commons with an option to use the Parliament Act as Maria Miller said hasn’t been ruled out.

  14. Hope they have their resumes ready when they are fired by the people for their abuses of their rights and the law.

  15. Robert in S. Kensington 11 Feb 2013, 4:19pm

    I do wish more Lords such as Deben speak up in support. Once again, the Telegraph reporting the opinions of a few voting against giving the impression that it will be scuppered.

    If more than half the conservative lords vote against, that doesn’t mean it’s going to be rejected. Look at the Commons vote last tuesday. 400-175 is a huge majority in favour, with over half of the Tories voting against. but it passed resoundingly in spite of the opposition.

  16. ….this word EQUAL is really starting to get on my nerves, because GAY people are NOT getting any equality so why keep calling and naming the issue ‘equal’, when it obviously means it doesn’t take place…???

  17. Robert (Kettering) 11 Feb 2013, 5:46pm

    Sorry but not one of these “Lords” has a mandate to sit in the House of Lords through a ballot box vote so, as far as I’m concerned, whatever they have to say is of no consequence and certainly undemocratic.

    If they try to damage the SSM Bill then they sign their own death warrant and the sooner they’re all cleared out and an elected Lords is put in place the better for democracy.

  18. What bout creating a human barrier on the day of the vote, so that no one can enter the house of lords?

  19. Spanner1960 11 Feb 2013, 6:14pm

    Whatever people may think of the Lords in this particular case, we need them;

    Remember in 1997 when Nu Labour got in with a landslide victory and won a 179-seat overall majority? When a situation like that occurs, a party can do pretty well what the hell it likes because there is so little opposition. That is an extremely dangerous situation to be in, and the primary reason why the Lords exists. No single party should ever have that much power.

    Labour by then were issuing new laws at the rate of 1-2 a day, and thank God the Lords chucked most of them right back at them and told them to think it through and try again. Had it not been for the Lords, this country would have been awash with new crap laws dreamed up at the drop of a hat.

    They may appear to be trying to throw a spanner in the works, but that is the point of good democracy, the solid politics will rise to the surface, and the railroaded dross will end up getting dropped.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 11 Feb 2013, 7:01pm

      Don’t forget, the current composition of the Lords is slightly stacked in favour of the Tories. There isn’t supposed to be a majority of any party in the upper chamber but now there is. By railroaded dross, I hope you don’t mean that’s an allusion to equal marriage.

      1. There are more Labour peers right now than Tory peers. Labour 224, Tories 212, Libs 90.

        1. Robert in S. Kensington 12 Feb 2013, 12:33pm

          Really, Alex, I hope that is correct. Thank you for providing the figures.

  20. Gay Activist Paul Mitchell 12 Feb 2013, 9:10am

    If the SSM Bill fails in the House of Bigots (Lords), then the bill goes straight to the Queen for Royal Assent!

    That is what the Parliament Act is for!

    Conditions for this to happen:

    The bill first must be introduced and passed the House of Commons first!

    The bill must fail in the House of Lords three times or not debate on the bill for a minimum of a year.

    And Thirdly:
    The bill must not be about money, appropriations or taxation to fail (this is the same with the Senate in Australia).

    1. And fourthly, it must be in either the manifesto or the Queens speech, which it wasn’t. Face it mate, if the Lords block it, we’re screwed

  21. Lord Lawson of Blaby you stupid idiot why would you oppose gay marriage and make gay peoples life a misery. Go get a life…being a Lord does not make you God.

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.