UK Government Stance on Gay Marriage

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Portillo, one time nearly leader of the conservative party, on This week discussed the dire situation of the conservative party. They did not win the last election which resulted in the coalition government, and even simply on historical grounds will do worse at the next. Governments always do. So their next chance might be in 2020, which will mean they are approaching the all time record for a major UK political party not to win power. Portillo argued that the gay marriage debate exactly illustrated their problem. Cameron recognised that there was no alternative but to support this bill, because there was a majority both in the country and in the commons for it to happen. So had he opposed it, it might still have passed, and then been a total victory for opposition parties with conservatives completely as the villains. So he supported it.

The problem is, his party didnt. Each one who stood up in the house of commons and complained that this spelled the end of the world failed to appreciate that the world had changed. Each one drove in another coffin nail for their failure at the next general election. Worse, Cameron is still fighting a rearguard action against the anti-europe faction in his party, which issue will not settle down as this one will, but will continue rumbling indefinitely. Conservative ant-europeans think they might have a chance because public opinion is at least hostile to europe, whereas in the gay debate it was clearly against them. Not that they took much notice of common sense in that debate either. The british public may be vaguely hostile to europe, but it really doesnt care. What they will see is a battle royal within the conservative party just getting bigger and bigger as the next election approaches, and conservatives becoming ever less electable.

So this issue raises the question of why the conservative party exists at all.
 

cruztbone

Experimental Member
Joined
May 22, 2004
Posts
1,284
Media
0
Likes
11
Points
258
Age
70
Location
Capitola CA USA
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
nontheless, dandelion, congratulations on the British Parliament doing the RIGHT THING !!! i hope you will keep us informed if you decide to marry. this is the civil rights movement of the early 21st century , and we are a big part of it. hold your head high, and be proud, Dandelion.
 

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,616
Media
50
Likes
4,782
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
yes, I know, even if the conservative party is being dragged kicking and screaming into the brave new world.

Behind the Conservative Party is the constituency-based Conservative Associations. These often have a very old average membership age, in terms of those who actually take part an average frequently around 70+ (and they are experts at organising 90th and 100th birthday parties). I'm not sure whether these Associations have very different views to this age group in the population as a whole. But yes they are very old fashioned. And many of them have got very worked up over the gay marriage issue and threatened their MPs with deselection and worse if they didn't vote against.

This has not been an easy issue for the Conservative party, but the party has got on with it and produced a free vote knowing this would get it through. In a way the party is looking to engage directly with the nation and less with the associations.
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
The Church and the State are Johnny come latelys to the institution of marriage, and frankly, IMHO, they can both fuck off with their pretending now to have a right to dictate what it is and who should be able to do it.

Marriage is a legal contract. As far as I understand these things, you need a couple of adults and a witness or two to make a contract. You don't need a fucking church nor a political party for that matter.
 

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,616
Media
50
Likes
4,782
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Martin Luther said marriage is a "worldly thing". It is indeed a legal contract, fundamentally requiring the consent of two individuals before witnesses.

It is the a Roman Catholic Church which sees marriage as a sacrament - I don't think other churches do. For most in the Western tradition it is a solemnisation or consecration, basically a blessing. Personally I don't see why churches other than the RC church are making a big issue about blessing a same sex union. The RC view that it is a sacrament at least gives a reason for their refusal but I don't see this applies to any other church.

I'm amused at Drifterwood's minimalistic marriage. A couple of adults and a witness or two may still be a church. The doctrine of the priesthood of all believers means that it only takes two or more to gather in Christ's name for Christ to be present. He's probably got a Church without knowing it! What he doesn't need is the church building.
 

loncam

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Feb 11, 2012
Posts
279
Media
7
Likes
322
Points
258
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I dont see why in this era non-consummation should be a specific ground for divorce. This all harks back to a time when divorce was exceedingly difficult but now it isnt. Likewise, I dont reall see why we need any grounds except that one of the parties wants to dissolve the marriage. From the states perspective, its a contract which gives certain privileges and needs a formal way to end it.

Agree - same arguement applies to str8s
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Today the welsh secretary, David Jones (conservative), gave his view on this issue interviewed on ITV wales, saying "gay couples 'clearly' cannot provide a 'warm and safe environment' in which to raise children." BBC News - Cabinet minister: Gay couples cannot provide safe environment for children

Once this became national news he rapidly retracted the statement, explaining it had been misunderstood out of context and that he did not say gay couples should not be allowed to adopt children. He said he believed his constituents were overwhelmingly opposed to gay marriage. Which might, of course, be true, but if so they are not in the least typical af the population as a whole, which supports it.
 

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,616
Media
50
Likes
4,782
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I've just seen a Kent local paper. It has a big spread of letters condemning gay marriage. Bear in mind that this is well after the parliamentary vote at a time when I would have thought people would be finding something else to get angry about.

I think it has to be accepted that there are a large number of people in the UK who do oppose gay marriage. Personally I don't agree with these people, but they are a significant group. Kent has 17 Conservative MPs from 17 constituencies. From memory Kent County Council has something like 71 Conservative councillors and 3 Labour. The Conservatives really have upset many of their core followers in their heartlands by bringing gay marriage to parliament (knowing it would go through). I know there's the view that they did it for political reasons, but there might also be the case that they did it for the right reason because it is right, even though it has hurt them.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
it hasnt hurt their core vote. The right party cannot lose votes by doing something left, because who else will the right voters vote for? (and vice versa). It may indeed have hurt them because it has highlighted publicly a rift within the party, the result has been not so much to show they are a modern centrist party but that they have a majority of right wing reactionaries.