The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Syndicate contentRSS

Gay marriage: Cameron's battle begins

Determined to secure a legacy, the PM has picked a fight with his own voters.

The coalition's long-trailed consultation on gay marriage finally begins today. And the outcome, it appears, has been largely pre-determined. As Lynne Featherstone, the equalities minister, who is leading the consultation, tells today's Independent, "The essential question is not whether we are going to introduce same-sex civil marriage but how." Elsewhere, in an op-ed for today's Times (£), Theresa May becomes the latest senior Conservative to declare her support for the proposal, making the sound argument that marriage, a social good, should be extended to as many people as possible.

With the support of so many cabinet ministers, it's hard to see gay marriage not becoming law by 2015. For David Cameron, desperate for his government not to be defined by deficit reduction alone, this is a chance to effect lasting social change.

But he will face significant clerical and parliamentary resistance. The government has already agreed to give Conservative ministers, some of whom are prepared to resign over the issue, a free vote in the Commons. Defence minister Gerald Howarth, for instance, has already clumsily declared his opposition to gay marriage: "Some of my best friends are in civil partnerships, which is fine, but I think it would be a step too far to suggest that this is marriage".

Then there's the church. The government has already ruled out making it compulsory for religious organisations to host gay marriages but that hasn't placated the faithful. Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the leader of the Roman Catholic church in Scotland, has shamed himself by comparing same sex marriage to slavery, while Rowan Williams has argued that the law cannot be used to impose cultural change, and cannot run ahead of public opinion.

Williams is right: more of the public are opposed to gay marriage than in favour of it. But the gap is not as great as some imagine. As I noted earlier this week, according to a recent YouGov poll, 43 per cent of voters support gay marriage, with 47 per cent opposed [32 per cent of whom support the current alternative of civil partnerships] and 10 per cent undecided. Worryingly for Cameron, however, while 51 per cent of Labour voters and 53 per cent of Lib Dems support same sex marriage, just 30 per cent of Tories do. I know of one pro-gay marriage Conservative MP who missed church on Sunday for fear of being accosted by parishioners. The concern among some Tories is that UKIP, explicitly opposed to gay marriage, will provide a welcome home for any would-be defectors.

And should Cameron change the law, he may not receive much credit for doing so. The YouGov poll I mentioned earlier revealed that 63 per cent of votes think that the PM supports gay marriage for purely "political reasons". Only 21 per cent think that he "genuinely believes that is the right thing to do". The greatest challenge for Cameron, then, is to convince the public that he is acting out of principle, rather than political expediency.

26 comments

Hugh Markey's picture

It's is all quite confusing. The Truimvirate or the Shamrock view of God is a foundation belief of the Christian Church. No mention of womankind!
The Catholic priesthood are unable to marry and they are obviously in the same position as gay men.
Jesus was unmarried and well past marriageable age when he entered the public world.
At his bidding. some of his disciples left wife and family to follow him.
HIs Mother, Mary, did not have conjugal relations with Joseph her nominal husband. She gave birth to the Son of God. Just many Greek and Roman aristocrats spun that fairy tale of having a God for a parent. Alexander the Great for one. And always the male half,
Not much evidence for the sanctity of marriage there.
Don't even look at the doings of Royalty down the centuries.
James the First wasn't the first. King Billy wasn't the last. And that's even before we get to the French Court and the French cardinals.
If people want to get married - let them regardless of gender, colour or creed.

All God's Chilun

Jon's picture

70% of Tory voters disagree with Mr Cameron, but that's not the point. Very few of these voters would consider defecting to UKIP, a party without a single a MP. The Tories have had the luxury of monopolising the right-wing vote in this country for over a century. Mr Cameron knows full well that he can take right-wing, rural and Home Counties votes for granted. Urban middle class votes in marginal constituencies are a much more attractive prospect.

homeslice's picture

There are no benefits to gay marriage, not for society, not for your community. Its a large tear in the moral fabric we've worked hard to preserve. It indicates all sorts of problems ahead.

Todd's picture

I found it surprising to come across such bigoted views as above on this website. I suppose the illiberal left is 'alive' and unwell and I can only wish it find some measure of spiritual and social comfort - it must be very tricky being so consumed with a true hatred for love.

DJ's picture

The proposal should go further and include that religious ceremonies be allowed also. The civil Partnership acc states s2(5) 'no religious service to be used' and s6(1)(a) must not be in a religious premises.

If a person can be baptised, confirmed and have a funeral why should the church be allowed to prevent a person of that faith having their legal civil partnership blessed in their place of worship?

MartinC's picture

The consultation period leading to a open vote on Gay Marriage is
apparently a sham. The minister responsible for the proposal says opposition to it is merely "homophobia" since it is a forgone
conclusion. Ms Featherstone made clear that her mind is already made up, giving a "cast-iron guarantee" that civil gay marriage would become law by the next general election in 2015.

"There is no rolling back whatsoever," she said. "The essential question is not whether we are going to introduce same-sex civil marriage but how."

How is it that a LibDem minister, supposedly committed to free democracy and equality is giving a "cast iron guarantee" that her will be done?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/lynne-featherstone-church...

Jill Allden's picture

Gay Marriage has been legal in Canada since 2005.
What hasn't happened since then: people have not gone on to marry dogs or children or rubber ducks.
What has happened since then: everyone has been allowed to love who they want to love.
How does gay marriage effect you directly? The answer is that it doesn't.
All of you getting on your high horses and saying that "Its a large tear in the moral fabric we've worked hard to preserve,": what is more moral than love?

Tesco Shelf Stacker's picture

The political class once again prove how far removed from the mood of the general public they really are. Gay marriage isn't that important an issue for people right now. To be perfectly blunt about it - they dont care if a gay couple get married in a church, a register office or a Drive-thru McDonalds. Gay, lesbian and bisexual population account for less than 2% of the population, most people honestly think that Britain has bigger issues to deal with than gay marriage.

This seems to be nothing but a political circus in an attempt to keep people distracted from the bigger issues they face.

Tesco Shelf Stacker's picture

Btw: Does this legislation cover synagogues and mosques too?

Cos if it does, then I look forward to that one happening! Sheesh!

Neil's picture

The only people Cameron may alienate are the fruitcake fringe who may scurry off to UKIP. It's a pro-liberal policy so any UKIP defections are likely to be offset by neocon Lib Dems who have realised their tories after all.

Fergus Pickering's picture

If you want to love a twelve year old, are you allowed to in Canada? No. Then you can't love who you like, can you?

DJ's picture

@ Fergus Pickering

Are you really implying some connection between gay marriage and pedophilia?

jamiego's picture

A. Cole - how does your logical fallacy contribute to this argument?

Graeme Hancocks's picture

I cannot understand Rowan Williams sometimes. For a highly intelligent and reasonable man, some of his arguments are very weak. If he truly believes "that the law cannot be used to impose cultural change, and cannot run ahead of public opinion" then surely this country should still be happily hanging and flogging people - things he (I belive rightly) believes barbaric and have no place in modern society but which the general public in their wisdom - or lack of it - still strongly support. Sometimes legislators really need to lead by considered example. As a christian priest it depresses me just how often churches have to be dragged to a more humane understanding of the complexities of life.

The RC and CofE are not being asked to conduct marriage services for gay people (sadly). "The slippery slope" idea is a nonsense. For example it is many decades since the reform of divorce laws but do you see any sign of a more relaxed attitude or practice by the RC Church? But there are churches and religious groups that do want to extend this to their gay members - such as the Qaukers, Unitarians, Community churches etc, let alone many of us within the RC and Anglican church. How dare the RC and CofE hierarchy pretend to speak for us all. They don't!

Fergus Pickering's picture

Paedophilia is the love of children. Twelve tear olds are not children. Theybcan't be, since they can be given free condoms without their parents' knowledge. That wouldn't be so if they were children, would it? Besides, in many cultures, and in ours yers ago, twelve year olds can marry. They can certainly bearchildren if they are female and father the if they are male. I said nothing whatever about gay marriage. As it happens I am for it, but I am not for people saying silly, sloppy things that are not true. And if you cannot see the difference between sex with a twelve year old and sex with a five year old or a one year old, then you are wilfully obtuse.

Mr Danger's picture

"most people honestly think that Britain has bigger issues to deal with than gay marriage"

It does. But this doesn't prevent anyone from dealing with those bigger issues. Believe it or not government can handle more than one issue at a time.

Honestly, the argument that "we'll take care of gay marriage once we've solved every other problem in the universe" is just a cowards way out. If you don't like gay marriage at least have to courage to say so.

And if you still insist that this is taking up too much time, then shut up and get out of the way. It will go faster.

A. Cole's picture

Jami ego

I am wondering what benefits can be gained from pandering to the gay community at every opportunity....other than massaging the egos of sanctamonious liberals??

A. Cole's picture

How does homosexuality benefit society? What does it produce???

Flashbuck's picture

Gay so-called marriage is contrary to the laws of plumbing. Fact.

Flashbuck's picture

Normal natural people disaprove of gay so-called marriage because it devalues and undermines their own marriage by equating two hairy man sharing each other's filthy poop shute with what happens in a genuine, natural relationship between a male and a female. Fact.

james's picture

what i really like about the gay marriage opinions flinging themselves around is that they have to expose themselves to be heard. its about time chumpolinas realized its language, people will and always will enter the cocoa passage. married people are not the best people, they are only equal among many types of life form, they need to realize this.

Indu Pendent's picture

I havent quite worked out the difference between a registry office civil partnership and same sex marriage. They have the same tax and legal status.

I know lots of people in civil partnerships which carries higher status than marriage for gay people. I dont understand why the hetrosexual community wants to downgrade it a registry office marriage.

If gay marriage is approved by parliment what will happen to the thousands of people who are currently in civil partnerships? Will they be forced to adopt being married even if they want to stay civil partners?

Its sounds to me like a fad.

The statistic are saying the silent majority are indifferent -- and yet even the gay community dont have a strong opinion.

What is Cameron trying to prove? That he is gay friendly? This bandwagon hasnt worked.

QaF Boxset's picture

Poor Tony Blair, with his shit-eating grin out in Africa, having to play down the idea of same-sex marriage, in a country where you get 5 years for 'voluntary sodomy'.

Remarkable really, that in 2000 years of dominance in the West, Christianity was basically broken by their failure to rewrite or amend the constitution (the Bible) to reflect enlightened, humanitarian modernity.

Sam's picture

Flashbuck - that's like me saying that you commenting on this site devalues and undermines my commenting because you're a homophobic gimp and I'm not.

I'll personally be very proud if we legalise marriage for all consenting adults. There's no evidence-based reason for opposing it.

Plug's picture

Flashbuck, I remember Boy George saying that in his experience the louder men proclaim their homophobia, the harder they like to be fucked.

And it's 'chute'. Your so-called contributions are contrary to the laws of orthography. Fact.

Tom Lowe's picture

As a devout Jew, I find the prospect of gay marriage disgusting!!! My Rabi teaches me in the Synagogue that marriage is between man and women. Please Cameron stop this!!!

Latest tweets