Reader comments · Lord Singh amendment calling for equal marriage referendum withdrawn in Lords debate · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Lord Singh amendment calling for equal marriage referendum withdrawn in Lords debate

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. FANTASTIC! :)

  2. That There Other David 10 Jul 2013, 11:43pm

    It had absolutely no chance. Just yet one more attempt to “kick the issue into the long grass”. They’ve lost, big time. The Bill will become an Act in England and Wales, and Scotland will follow immediately after.

    Then on to the next battleground, the upcoming Pensions Bill. Enough of the Lords and MPs have noted the survivor benefits discrimination. We need to keep that message up to ensure those are equalised when that Bill goes through.

  3. I wish someone would table an amendment requiring a referendum on whether Sikhs are allowed to marry. I am sure that someone can manipulate data to show that children of Sikhs do not do as well as children of other religions. That should be sufficient reason to deny their parents equal rights, according to this old bigot’s logic.

    1. Why bring other Sikhs into it at all? Why not just have an referendum on whether Lord Singh should be allowed to be married?

      1. While we’re at it, can we have a referendum to decide whether Lord Singh should have any involvement in the legislation of this land in the first place?

  4. Reading the recent updates I am pleased that it seems the supporters of the bill appear to be less reserved about expressing their distaste at the persistent bigotry and inanity of the opposition. Not only are each and every one of their proposals being denied, but the opposition have greatly harmed any credibility they may have had through the rabid stupidity and bloody-minded stubbornness of their efforts.

    It is not simply that the bill is passing each legislative hurdle, it is that the size of each victory is thoroughly discrediting the opposition.

  5. Is it just me or does that Lord Singh’s whiney old voice get on every one else’s tits as well? When we entered our own Civll Partnership 3 years ago we had several Sikh couple friends as guests – and they all gave brilliant and expensive presents! Not that we wanted any – but my point is – is Lord Singh really the best example of a “successful” member of the Sikh community? Shame on him for misrepresenting his faith. Dreadful man

  6. I live in a predominantly Sikh community in California. I know many seek people that are wonderful and kind people.

    But I also think Lord Singh’s use of the Regnerus study brings everlasting shame to the Sikh community he represents. It is one thing to oppose same sex marriage. And one can also express fears about what will happen to the children of these marriages.
    But it’s something else to propound an obviously false study that studied only three gay couples and their children. This type of propaganda was similar to Nazi era big lies. It is the same garbage that Sikhs have been victimized with.

  7. These religious types really can be quite devious in their opposition to equal marriage.

  8. May I ask a question? I just read through the live blog of the debate over the various amendments (on schools, sisters and carers, pensions, a referendum, etc), and in all but a few cases, the amendments were withdrawn, very shortly after they were tabled. Why bother introducing all of these amendments only to have a short debate followed by withdrawal? It seems like a waste of time if the sponsoring peer is unwilling to see the matter through to a vote.

    1. I agree. It might be to let people know they are still alive. Often I’ve watched the live feed and thought ‘is the one dead or sleeping’.
      I doubt these miserable sods get listened to in the real world.
      It will be great to see the bill move on.
      But it will leave a legacy – how bigoted, hateful and out if touch so many in the HoL are and I wonder if they have hastened their own downfall.

    2. bobbleobble 11 Jul 2013, 9:44am

      Sometimes amendments are raised simply to make a point or draw attention to an issue which the particular MP or peer feels should be considered. Very often then the minister in charge will address the particular issue at a later date or at the very least others will begin to consider the issue in more depth. Those amendments are never really meant to be voted on. I think Lord Alli’s pension amendment might possibly fall into this category.

      Other times an amendment is proposed and when it is debated its sponsor considers whether or not the support is there for it to pass depending on the speeches given. If they gauge that the support isn’t there then the amendment is withdrawn rather than having to go through a vote when the amendment will simply be rejected anyway.

  9. I think the places of worship that wish to flout the law and not perform same-sex marriage ceremonies should be compelled to pay a tax.

    1. That There Other David 11 Jul 2013, 8:10am

      They won’t be flouting the law, since the law explicitly exempts them from having to perform same-sex marriages.

      I wouldn’t worry though. There will be plenty of religious locations that opt in for those that want them. Not immediately of course, since they all have to go through the necessary process within their own hierarchies, but within five years it’ll come.

  10. I do hope Lord Singh realizes this is the UK, it’s not the Punjab, India! No one has ask for the removal of the cloth on his head, so I hope he should be sensitive enough to realize that the UK can accommodate all of it’s diversity and he should not stand in the way of the same-sex marriage bill.

  11. Robert in S. Kensington 11 Jul 2013, 1:43pm

    I emailed him a couple of weeks ago suggesting, tongue in cheek, that we have a referendum banning turbans in public and in Parliament because some of us find it distasteful or against one’s beliefs. No response of course but I can only surmise it might have made him realise that his amendment was absurd and discriminatory.

    I’ve listened to him from the outset of the Lords’ debate and his voice just makes me cringe.

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.