Why Has the Gay Marriage Issue Exploded ?
ftv
Posts: 31,668 Forum Member
✭✭✭
It wasn't in the Tory manifesto, it wasn't in the Queen's speech and until a few weeks ago you hardly heard anything about it in the media.
Now I hear Tory MPs are in revolt over gay marriage, Cameron's position is in jeopardy, teachers are threatened with the sack if they don't teach it (do they teach heterosexual marriage ?) and all sorts of pressure groups are jumping on the bandwagon.
I can't see there has been any significant development in the actual issue so why has it suddenly burst upon the scene ?
Now I hear Tory MPs are in revolt over gay marriage, Cameron's position is in jeopardy, teachers are threatened with the sack if they don't teach it (do they teach heterosexual marriage ?) and all sorts of pressure groups are jumping on the bandwagon.
I can't see there has been any significant development in the actual issue so why has it suddenly burst upon the scene ?
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
It's making me a bit embarrassed of England tbh.
Gay marriage is what Cameron thinks will put his mark on the map. He will be remembered for it historically.
They should have never introduced Civil partnerships, it was a way of appeasing the masses whilst only giving gay people a halfway house act of law.
They cocked up.
I will tell you now, I do intend to gloat. In fact it will be mother of all gloating.
most people couldnt give a monkeys
its such a small number of marriages about 2%
they should try spending time fixing the economy
which affects 100%
It seems you've heard quite a lot.
It was in the Tory contract for equalities which was released three days prior to the election and which formed part of the Tory manifesto. In any event there was nothing in their manifesto about the NHS reforms they undertook but no one tried to claim they shouldn't be passed for that reason.
You're right it wasn't in the Queen's speech but the Queen's speech did contain a commitment for House of Lords reform which has since disappeared and the Queen's speech has no binding power on what Parliament can or can't do so that's not relevant either.
There is no truth to the scaremongering put about that teachers will be sacked for not teaching it whatever that means anyway. Michael Gove has said repeatedly that there will be no action taken against teachers who have differing views on same sex couples marrying. I'd also point out that teachers aren't in the classroom to tell children their own personal opinions.
The pressure groups jumping on the band wagon are largely religious groups who want to impose their version of marriage on the rest of society.
The reason why it's in the news a lot at the moment is because there is to be a vote on the issue on Tuesday. Same sex marriage is likely to be approved and it will then go on to the next legislative stages. There can be no revolt because it's not a whipped vote for any of the parties. You can't revolt by voting against something if you're entitled to vote against it anyway.
It isn't sudden though, the Lib Dems made it party policy in 2010 and Cameron mentioned it in 2011 in his speech to the party conference. There was a months long consultation last year which resulted in around 53% of respondents favouring the introduction of marriage for gay couples.
Yes pretty much agree with this.
Which is how it should be. I can't see why any couple should be given tax breaks simply for being in a relationship, let alone in the midst of a recession with cutbacks everywhere. Surely it's enough to have your bottom drawer filled without the state having to provide financial incentives to enter and remain in an outmoded construct which increasingly ends in divorce.
only about 4% of tories polled and 2% from Labour, care about it. It's the bottom of the list of things anyone really is bothered about.
The only ones who are kicking up a storm are tory MPs and the Tory Press. No one really cares and I suspect just wish they'd hurry up and pass it into law.
It's estimated that same sex marriages will boost the economy by £18m a year. Not a huge amount but it helps.
This matter is being dealt with by the DCMS, what should they be doing to try to fix the economy? Plus you do know governments are able to do more than one thing at a time right?
I'm not a member of the political or media elite but I very much want the right to get married.
How much time do you actually think they'll be spending on this? There's one day of debate on the second reading followed by a vote on Tuesday and then it goes off to committee. Eventually there'll be a third reading and it'll be off to the Lords. If this takes more than 2% of time from this Parliament then I'll be astounded. Then they can spend plenty of time messing up the economy further.
The current situation seems to me a complete dogs dinner because of the piecemeal way it has been arrived at. How much more sensible if all couples could be offered a choice between a civil partnership/ wedding, leading to inheritance and pension rights, and a church partnership/ wedding , leading to the same legal rights, where the church wishes to offer this.
Of course it would be simpler but when have we ever done anything the simple way in this country!
Seems you were wrong then.
Well put. Marriage,of course, should be between a man and a woman. Simple.
I am gay and don't want to get married (wouldn't if I was straight either), but I have friends who have been together years and getting married would mean the world to them. It's not like they could bring any more shame and disrespect to marriage than straight people already havr done!
Next on the agenda should be gay adoption.
Marriage involves whatever the law says it involves. If you don't want to marry someone of the same sex then you don't have to.
Why though?
Why should it?
True, but it's still not 100% equal if the Church of England can't preform them. Most religious people I know (might just be the area I live in) are CofE*.
*Although due to the sort of people I hang round with I also know a few pagans...
Gay people already can adopt as a couple or as an individual.
The teacher bit confuses me, they don't teach about any kind of marriage, unless its more tolerance perhaps!?
I have a 5 and 6 year old and they know in the basic terms that men can marry men and women marry women and men and women can marry each other, they're don't think any of the options is strange, in fact at the moment, my 6 year old thinks marrying a girl is quite gross!!
It's at the fore because legislation is to be voted on in the Commons on Tuesday. If passed it is the first major step towards allowing gay couples to marry legally as opposed to just pretending that civil partnerships are the same thing.