Reader comments · Lib Dem MP John Pugh criticised for voting against equal marriage bill — Simon Hughes and Tim Fallon abstained · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Lib Dem MP John Pugh criticised for voting against equal marriage bill — Simon Hughes and Tim Fallon abstained

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Once again these representative of each community are voting for their own personal beliefs and NOT those of their constituents – Stop them and demand they represent you.

  2. Robert in S. Kensington 23 May 2013, 1:25pm

    Since equal marriage is official Liberal Democratic policy, Pugh and others should resign and defect to UKIP.

    1. Um, it was a free vote, so… (Tho I agree with the principle of what you’re saying.)

      1. Um, Sasha. I usually refrain from castigating many people; but, you seem to think you are living in Wonderland with Sweet Little Alice. However, comrade, we are at war, and it is we on the front lines and whom are the soldiers and family members being kill, beaten and punished for who we are. When you are attacked in a park, had your head smashed in, teeth kicked out, then you earn the right to come here and defend those that act against us. At this point in the history of time, this was not a free vote, we have paid with our suffering. The former black slaves of the world, would not come on here and say, “Um, it was a free vote… .

        So, I recommend you get some olive oil and a paint brush. Dip the brush in the oil and rub it around your neck, rub it high into the hair line and completely coat everything well. Then grab yourself by the back of your trousers, give a really hard, backwards yank to pull your head out of your ass.

        1. Paul Brownsey 23 May 2013, 4:58pm

          Ra, you seem to have no idea what, in House of Commons, a free vote is. Your letter shows no sign of understanding of that, and you berate Sasha–from behind your brave veil of anonymity, of course–for something she didn’t mean at all.

          1. Paul, I know what a free vote means; but in hate and war, you don’t pat the enemy on the back for attacking you, approving their right to do so. Furthermore, this is a venue of comradery to support the our community and vent, not theirs, and Sasha has made former post supporting peoples right to hate.

            As for your jibe at being veiled, it is a moot point- no fool would place their name, phone number and address on such a public form. I have no problem meeting with, sharing my opinion or debating with anyone of a reasonable mind. Granted, I work with the neurotic and psychotic often, I don’t choose to give them my home details.

          2. Midnighter 23 May 2013, 6:04pm

            Ra, you aren’t making any sense to me either. Stating that a Commons vote is free is not a qualitative statement and cannot denote an opinion. Nor does it specify a subject at whom any such opinion could be directed as being “an enemy”.

            If you have a point to make, you haven’t explained it successfully.

            Your follow up seems to imply you think that Sasha was approving of the Lib Dem opposition votes, which he clearly wasn’t. His point was a challenge to the premise, not the sentiment of the previous posters comment.

  3. “You have to be prepared for massive misrepresentation and misunderstanding, often unintentional but understandable, given the emotional trauma many gay people have endured.”

    A trauma caused by people like John Pugh who doesn’t consider gay people worthy of marriage.
    He’s just another reminder that the Tories have no monopoly on homophobia.

    1. bobbleobble 23 May 2013, 1:27pm

      We’re liars and too stupid to understand what he’s saying in effect.

  4. bobbleobble 23 May 2013, 1:26pm

    I’m so fed up of the weasel words of these people. Pugh be honest. You voted against because you’re a Catholic and you don’t have the balls to stand up for your Liberal principles in the face of your religion. You may as well be MP for the Vatican and I hope, although doubt, that you are truly ashamed of your betrayal of your party and your principles.

  5. Midnighter 23 May 2013, 1:38pm

    Pugh presents a totally nonsensical argument.

    He acknowledges the proposed equality legislation could be improved yet he uses this as a reason to justify voting against any attempt at equality as being somehow preferable.

    He predicates his rejection on the “rocky state” of marriage as it stands (without explaining why he believes this to be the case), and fallaciously links this to a further unsubstantated assumption that this legislation harms rather than strengthens.

    He wishes to portray the bills treatment as somehow hasty and insufficient ( “I question whether re-writing centuries of marriage law on the hoof”,) where in fact it has undergone due parliamentary procedure.

    In short his “argument” is logically invalid and lacking in factual basis in its reported form. Otherwise known as “hot air”.

  6. “You have to be prepared for massive misrepresentation and misunderstanding, often unintentional but understandable, given the emotional trauma many gay people have endured.”

    FFS. Is this for real or is this actually coming from a politician that calls himself a liberal?

    Even Liam Fox (infamous homophobe and bête noire of social liberals) added, as a disclaimer to his opposition to gay marriage, that his experience as a GP led him to believe homosexuality was not a product of psychopathology.

    Pugh’s views do not even belong in the 70’s.

  7. The pusillanimous reaction of LibDems when faced with doing something that they supposedly are in favor of illustrates very well why they should never be trusted to actually govern this country. They are simply unreliable and cowardly. I will never trust them.

    1. While the party leadership declaring it a free vote seems like a bad thing, whipping would have resulted in bad PR for the bill, even more calls claiming it was undemocratic, and the strong majority sending a much weaker message to the Lords. For at most 13 more votes when it already had a huge majority, it would have been a really bad idea. So I don’t think allowing the free vote was in any way “unreliable or cowardly”. We should be glad they did.

      In general there’s nothing “unreliable or cowardly” about MPs having stances disagreeing with their party, or voting on them during a free vote. The ugly thing here is what their stances were, not that they differed from the party. And it’s weird to fixate on the LDs there seeing as the other two parties had higher percentages of it.

      Also note that most (all?) LD seats are contested LD/Cons, not LD/Labour. Less LD MPs means more Conservative MPs. People need to consider the alternative before rejecting the status quo more.

  8. CH Brighton 23 May 2013, 2:41pm

    What is really unpleasant is the power over them of the religious organisations to which these MPs subscribe. Their religion has such a hold over them that while their conscience, intellect and personal experience may guide them one way, their adherence to religious doctrine obliges them to declare a belief that is contrary to their own nature and/ or intellect.

  9. Should be Tim Farron, not Fallon

  10. Carl ROwlands 23 May 2013, 5:16pm

    Simon Hughes, what a disappointment. Not surprised by his actions, I remember vividly when he stood against Peter Tatchell in the Bremondsley by- election in the 1980’s. A nasty campaign! Hiding, hiding, hiding!

    1. Campaign slogan used by Hughes in that election “I’ll be buggered if I vote Labour”

  11. Euan Davidson 23 May 2013, 5:47pm

    Sir Robert Smith had an important constituency engagement and Norman lamb was on ministerial duties both support equal marriage had important prior engagements

  12. It’s exactly what JD said first. I would be horrified if I voted for my Lib Dem MP and he voted against it. At a push I could accept abstaining but to vote against. Completely NOT what the Lib Dem party is supposed to represent.

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.