Thanks JY thought I was missing something!

I’m not even a Labour supporter FFS, people keep making me defend them!

atlaz – Member
Lifer – not wanting to stoke the fire, but in that case, his ranking of religious freedom above equality for a (relatively large) portion of our population indicates either an unwillingness to stand up to bigots or a nice healthy slice of bigotry for himself.

Sorry, it’s a binary issue so either he’s for it or against it. Saying that it’s too complicated to deal with means he’s siding with the people against equality.

I completely agree. But it’s not an example of him caving to the bigots in Labour, as Wrecker suggested, unless you can show me that he was pressured into making this decision by these same bigots.

OK, putting the bickering aside; the CPs were a pretty big step.
I’m not pro tory (I despise all parties equally), but I do believe that CMD and Nicky deserve some credit for trying to push this through particularly as they’re up against the nasty old school tories.
I get the feeling that there’s a degree of suspicion which would not be present (at least by the same individuals) if it were a leftist party doing this.

Gawd bless those tories and there freedom for gays agenda where would we be without them

Wind it in FFS. Who is now trying to legalise gay marriage? Who NEVER tried?

😆

Someone not-Tory agruing about Lab/Con with someone not-Labour. Nature abhors a vacuum!

EDIT – Is ‘planning to’ the same as ‘trying to’?

😛

“enfht – Member
Let everyone do whatever they want, with the same legal rights as married m/f couples but don’t call a partnership between same sex couples as “Marriage” ‘cos it aint.”

Well it aint legally at the moment but it should be. Not heard one single person say why it should not be.

cameron wouldnt be doing this if wasnt in a coalition
hes doing it to throw a scrap to cleggy so he can claim that hes done something vaguely libdemish

You’re probably right kimbers. It’s still bound to upset a load of old tory arseholes. Maybe they’ll all piss off in protest eh?

cameron wouldnt be doing this if wasnt in a coalition

Bear in mind that although he was a strong supporter of S28, he apologised for this in 2009. What he’s doing now is some evidence that he’s either had a Damascene conversion of sorts, or that he realised some time back that the Tories were out of step with the public. Either way. I don’t think the Libs can necessarily claim credit for this one.

Isn’t this nice – a potentially divisive topic debated in a largely tolerant fashion and only a bit of swearing! Was this weekend an epiphany moment for SWT?

only a bit of swearing!

😳
sorry.

Isn’t this nice – a potentially divisive topic debated in a largely tolerant fashion and only a bit of swearing! Was this weekend an epiphany moment for SWT?

No.

Do the asexual marry?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16552173

“enfht – Member
Let everyone do whatever they want, with the same legal rights as married m/f couples but don’t call a partnership between same sex couples as “Marriage” ‘cos it aint.”

Well it aint legally at the moment but it should be. Not heard one single person say why it should not be.

I’ve never heard a convincing argument on this point either.

But wrecker your prefaced the swearing with a “You probably right…”, so you will be forgiven for sure!! 😉

Do the asexual marry?

Yes, and the divorces are always a real bloddy mess.

NOT ME

Do the asexual marry?

Dunno but I’d wager that Tim **** a lot.

crankboy – Member

Well it aint legally at the moment but it should be. Not heard one single person say why it should not be.

That’s a good point, but to be honest, not heard why it should be either.
If you want to change the status quo, then that’s the more important argument that needs to be clarified.

Thanks JY thought I was missing something!

I’m not even a Labour supporter FFS, people keep making me defend them!

I am not a labour supporter How very dare you FFS I am left wing 😉

Wind it in FFS. Who is now trying to legalise gay marriage? Who NEVER tried?

Could you stay rational Wind it in – is that some counter to my point about who voted aginst the bills? Do these facts offend you- obviously they cannot be countered so best play me rather than the point I made, eh 🙄
Yes CMD and nick deserve some credit [ perhaps even lots] for trying to bring this in but you are ignoring who started the journey to this [ from frankly oppresive laws where gays were not to be seen as equal to heterosexuals- Labour mdecriminalised homosexuality ] , who opposed this [Tories], who opposed civil marriage [ tories] and who continues to oppose this[Tories] and who last intrdoced anti “gay” legislation – a Tory govt made the consetn age equal for gays and straights etc

Yes CMD deserveds praise but the race to equality for gays has been a journey hampered by tories not helped and they seem determined to continue to do this against the wishes of their leader.

The tories are not the champions of gay rights in this country even though the leader does seem to be trying his best to make them

I wish him luck

Winds kneck in

The tories are not the champions of gay rights in this country even though the leader does seem to be trying his best to make them

I never said they were!
If you took a moment and stopped getting het up about scoring political points and getting shouty about the tories, you’d see that the only thing that matters (regardless of who implements it) is that peoples rights are improved. To not make any progress for gay rights in 13 years, you’d need to be cryogenically frozen. The main thing is that it’s continued.

loam “If you want to change the status quo, then that’s the more important argument that needs to be clarified”

The status quo was that male homosexuality was illegal and lesbians did not exist.
We have moved on to recognising the sexuality of a significant percentage of the population and outlawing discrimination based on sexual orientation.
If we are truly to follow through with this civilised and morally right transition then same sex couples deserve to have exactly the same rights to public and legal recognition of their relationships as couples who happen to be of different sexes. IE if they are equal then they have an equal right to marry and should not be given a fudge of a legal status that’s sort of the same but has a different name. Was not the motto of racial segregation “equal but separate” and we all no how much fun that was.

Thanks crankboy.
It’s not an issue I’ve followed much, so whilst hearing about people being on one side or the other of “the argument”, rarely do I read what the argument actually is.

I would have been very disappointed if I wasn’t allowed to marry my wife just because of her gender. When you see how far we’ve come on gay rights, it’s surprising gay marriage is still not legal in the UK – but equally it’s inevitable that it will become so.

I hope the Tories in question live long enough to get irate about it.

Elf would of been priceless on this thread 😆

stopped getting het up about scoring political points and getting shouty about the tories,

I am not getting shouty and I am not scoring points, I am stating facts ..I am sorry if you dont like them

you’d see that the only thing that matters (regardless of who implements it) is that peoples rights are improved. To not make any progress for gay rights in 13 years, you’d need to be cryogenically frozen. The main thing is that it’s continued.

Yes
Society and tories still have some way to go on the journey to true acceptance though many are there already.

Are not all gay people already condem voters, as theyre usually affluent, well spoken, own their own homes,and have no need for social services provided for families who vote labour.

or am i mistaken.

I am not getting shouty and I am not scoring points, I am stating facts ..I am sorry if you dont like them

It’s going to take a while to get your head out of there……….

Society and tories politicians still have some way to go on the journey to true acceptance though many are there already.

FTFY

loum – Member
Thanks crankboy.
It’s not an issue I’ve followed much, so whilst hearing about people being on one side or the other of “the argument”, rarely do I read what the argument actually is.

You really needed to be told that it was about bringing the law in line with the reality of day to day life? 😯 I find that a little hard to believe but if so, kudos for asking.

really who cares who shags who? there are better things to spend money on. let them get married etc etc and be done with it and spend money on more bike lanes

Sorry, I voted for these idiots – cos I was fed up with last bunch of idiots I’d voted for.

Looking worryingly short of options for a fresh set of idiots to vote for at the next election…..

Vertical climber, it isnt about who is shagging who, but the equal right for two people of the same sex to have the same rights as two people of different sexes to each other, its about love, of sharing emotions and experiences, and most importantly as being accepted as a couple in a relationship, from everything from work and pension rights, to your freinds and family acepting you and your partner for what and who they are,and even to death when one partner dies.

Lifer – Member

Someone not-Tory agruing about Lab/Con with someone not-Labour. Nature abhors a vacuum!

EDIT – Is ‘planning to’ the same as ‘trying to’?

Is claiming you’re planning to the same as planning to?

atlaz
Like I said above, not really an issue I prioritise following, and the news (and the political point scorers on here) tend to coment more on the people involved (and their quest for votes) than the actual argument. Thats why I thanked crankboy for actually explaining that argument better than I’ve heard .
I don’t understand your point though. A law should reflect what’s right, not just “the reality of day to day life”. All crimes are a part of day to day life, but there’s no reason to change the law to accomodate them.

It’s going to take a while to get your head out of there

yes keep attacking me dont attack the facts or the argument 🙄

As for claiming it is politicians I posted up the voting earlier there were 2 labour and the rest were tory or tory supporting ones from NI who voted against civil partnership*- but dont let the facts detract from your view that it is “politicians ” generally rather than Tories specifically or from attacking me
Currently only tory MPs are getting upset about this proposal and organising to vote against movement towards equality for gay people ,apart from being wrong its a great point you made.
Couldd you not really respond to what I say or the facts [yet]again and give me a gentle insult instead?

Look Dave has done a sterling effort he his trying his best to do the right thing and i support him. However it is obvious that many [ 1/3 ish] in his party do not support this and are not progressive in terms of gay rights and their last govt passed and did not repeal legislation that discriminated against gays.

Calling me gentle names wont change this or make your argument any more persuasive.
* it was free vote as well there was no party whip

Not trolling; what’s the difference between a civil partnership and marriage anyway? I got married in a registry office and I wouldn’t know the difference…

As far as I can tell, they give pretty much the same rights and responsibilities but not allowing civil partnerships to be called a wedding and therefore a marriage is just a big slap in the face for Teh Gays.

There are lots of pretty obvious arguments for equality and I’m also yet to hear a convincing reason against.

Interestingly I think people vote for a party and their policies, not the people within it (Which change frequently). So in essence no-one voted for the idiots, they voted for the organisation that contained them (probably without knowing they existed) and some would say they didn’t vote them in 😀

A law should reflect what’s right, not just “the reality of day to day life”.

Actually I think laws are supposed to represent what the majority feel is appropriate for the times, since right and wrong are pretty hard to define and are a bit subjective.

I thought that the problem with “marriage” for same-sex couples was that they could then go on to claim discrimination if a church refused to carry out the ceremony?

There are lots of pretty obvious arguments for equality and I’m also yet to hear a convincing reason against.

the only one I am aware of is religious and that is that the sanctity of marriage is between a male and a female and this needs to be preserved.
I dont find this convincing either tbh.

yes keep attacking me dont attack the facts or the argument

Have you no self awareness at all?

coffeeking – Member
A law should reflect what’s right, not just “the reality of day to day life”.
Actually I think laws are supposed to represent what the majority feel is appropriate for the times, since right and wrong are pretty hard to define and are a bit subjective.

Fair enough, Coffeeking, right and wrong can be subjective but your “what the majority feel is appropriate for the times” seems reasonable.
This is different to “the reality of day to day life” though. My point was that changing laws to accomodate things purely because they are “the reality of day to day life” is madness, and not a coherent argument for same sex marriage to be legalised. I’m not arguing against it, just feel that this sort of nonsense does more to harm a cause than help it. For the record, this came from my coment above:

Well it aint legally at the moment but it should be. Not heard one single person say why it should not be.
That’s a good point, but to be honest, not heard why it should be either.
If you want to change the status quo, then that’s the more important argument that needs to be clarified.

Which crankboy replied to with an excelent explanation

he status quo was that male homosexuality was illegal and lesbians did not exist.
We have moved on to recognising the sexuality of a significant percentage of the population and outlawing discrimination based on sexual orientation.
If we are truly to follow through with this civilised and morally right transition then same sex couples deserve to have exactly the same rights to public and legal recognition of their relationships as couples who happen to be of different sexes. IE if they are equal then they have an equal right to marry and should not be given a fudge of a legal status that’s sort of the same but has a different name. Was not the motto of racial segregation “equal but separate” and we all no how much fun that was.