Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Scotland: Delegate slams ‘discriminatory views’ of Lib Dems who vote against same-sex marriage

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. The Abrahamic religions are, at their core, discriminatory. They rest on the idea that only the adherents of that particular set of beliefs are correct and will be going to paradise in the next life. That they are their god’s “chosen”. With that mind set comes the feeling of superiority and innate privilege that we see in regions where those religions dominate. This is always going to put religious belief at odds with equality. When it comes to the crunch, believers who claim to believe in equality always have to make a decision – do they really believe in full equality, or do they believe in equality as far as their religion will allow? The same reasons used to oppose equality for LGBT people today were (and in some places still are) used to justify discrimination against race, women and other religions.

    1. I think that Mr Carmichael makes a fundamental mistake in claiming that religious expression deserves more respect. It does not. When religious expression is being used to justify oppression is deserves no more respect than any other ideology used to oppress or denigrate others. I’m sure that Carmichael would not demand that we respect the racist expressions of a racist – who may well hold their racist views as earnestly and sincerely as any religious person. Bigotry is bigotry – that’s it. If people want to try and justify it as expression of their religion they may be fooling themselves – and apparently Mr Carmichael – but fortunately there are many others of us who are not so easily mislead.

    2. Correct. A homophobe is a homophobe – no matter where they obtain their ‘justification’. Same with a racist. The best law introudced over recent years to stop religious homophobia has been ‘incitement to hatred’. It should be used more often. ‘Believe’ what the hell you want. Just stop trying to have the State force others to agree with you.

  2. ....Paddyswurds 16 Sep 2013, 11:56am

    I wonder will the LibDems join the Tories before the election or wait until after they lose the election. Why you may well ask. Simply put they are now more Tory than the Tories. I never thought i would hear Shirley Williams, someone who I used to admire for her strenght, come out with the unbridled bigotry that she has in the last while. Is it real or is she in the early stages of dementia, one wonders?

    1. paddyswurds 16 Sep 2013, 11:58am

      strength **

    2. Equally agree, I previously thought Shirley Williams was a voice of reason but she has lost all credibility.

      She has demonstrated what a toxic threat strongly held religious views are to a secular democracy. She is clearly not worthy of the privileged position the Liberal Democrats have bestowed on her. If the Liberal democrats don’t deal with it then they also will have a credibility problems as a party.

      They say beware of a wolf in sheeps clothing and the whole same sex marriage debate has been fascinating in exposing the wolves of prejudice.

      Now days I have more respect for the straight out bigoted Tories, at least they are honest and you know where you are at with them. It is these bigoted Liberal Democrat and (Labour politicians), who usually say all the right things but when it comes to the vote, they are totally bigoted. To me they represent ideological fraud.

  3. “If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.”

    Karl Popper, The Paradox of Tolerance from The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945)

    Some religious people, even within the Lib-Dems understand this point and deserve respect. But others do not – and they wish to impose their religious intolerance upon us with discriminatory laws that apply in the secular context.

    That’s the difference. Shirley Williams and Sarah Teather et al are happy to impose their religious intolerance on us.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 16 Sep 2013, 12:28pm

      Don’t forget Simon Hughes who abstained in the third reading and who supported the wrecking amendments.

  4. Finally someone talking sense! The whole ‘YOU can’t get married, it’s against MY religion’ is getting very tiresome indeed. If you don’t like same-sex marriage, don’t have one – nobody’s forcing you fundies!

  5. “discriminatory views” cannot be defended or justified through religious “belief in a sky being.”

    – Couldn’t have put it better myself!

  6. People often fall for the idea that because something is really, really old and really, really rich you just have to “respect” it

    Some of us see through the smoke and mirrors though and can see religion for what it really is: mass brainwashing achieved through exploiting fear and vulnerability in order to consolidate power, wealth and influence for a handful of people

    To live your life in fear of “God” is to live your life in fear of Santa Clause; they are the exact same being !

    This is why I don’t tolerate people who live in fear of Santa Clause using a 2000 year old propaganda manual that has been plagiarized from other ancient myths to justify their hate.

    Not to mention how they hide behind their religion to justify their hate towards gay people yet seem to leave adulterers and contraception users well enough alone ! I can’t stand hypocrisy and lies being used against nature and stunting human growth, in that sense Religion is a crime against humanity in my book

  7. “And I can say I think their religious expression deserves a rather better respect than being referred as belief in something like a sky being.”

    – Religious views themselves deserve zero respect. I respect peoples’ rights to hold religious views – if they feel the need to do so. But to say the beliefs themselves deserve any respect at all, is just as ridiculous as the beliefs themselves.

  8. It is discrimination. People are free to express their bigotry if they like, but it’s right that a party which holds a fundamental belief in equality cannot be an appropriate place for someone who doesn’t support equality.

    If people want to hold discriminatory views, then a political party where going AGAINST THAT is the core belief is not the place for them.

    Callum Leslie is correct, if these people want to use their religious beliefs (or anything else) to encourage discrimination and inequality, they should not be a member of a party like the Lib Dems, the two are not conducive.

  9. Because they believe in talking snakes, evil apples, virgin giving birth, a man walking on water, worship death over current living, force children to be brides to old men , worship a paedophile as their leader, think they can turn wine into the blood, talking burring bush … , we should do whatever they want.

    Niutters that need deep conversion therapy to release them from their mass delusion.

  10. Liberal =
    Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.

  11. So belief that the parody of marriage in all it’s pseudo same-sex couplings(so-called ‘equal’ marriage) is absurd , is labeled as ‘discriminatory’ and a ‘thought crime’ .How very illiberal of the ‘liberal’.

    So much for having a free will and a conscience !

    1. LOL what an Idiot

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