The Marriage (same sex couples) Bill is currently whipping up a political storm. The PM is trying to force the bill through it's second reading by election later today and is being opposed by a large cross section of backbenchers on all sides of the House. The BBC reports suggest upwards of 120 Conservative MPs could vote against the government's plans, including some cabinet ministers.
For those that aren't aware of Parliamentary process here is a summary. The proposed law is written in draft, called a Bill. The Bill is read and debated in the House and then voted on whether or not it is a viable potential law. If successful it will be refined further, debated and read a second time. This is the stage that this particular Bill is at today. There is then a vote (tonight). If successful the Bill passes to a committee who look at all the practicalities if it becomes Law and how it would work in day to day life. Amendments can be made, but once passed by a committee it enters the reporting stage, where the committees amendments are voted on. At this stage it is passed to the other chamber of Parliament and if successful at that final vote it is passed by Royal Assent and becomes Law.
For my part I have no issue whatsoever with same sex marriage. If people want to make a legally recognised commitment to each other then they should be allowed. I think the Bill will pass, but only just.
It seems like a complete waste of energy and time to be pushing through a bill like this at a time like this. Coalition governments should leave contentious Bills and concentrate on working together to fix the economy.
This Bill is nothing more than a doffoing of the cap to the Lib Dems for their support.
I have no issues at all with Gay Marriage but I am not sure that this is the most appropriate time to be debating it when there are far more important things to deal with.
In a word Trev, Laïcité.
The separation of the Church and the State or, if you prefer (which I do) French Secularism.
I'm not particularly religious but I do believe that the State has no place in making demands on the Church or the Church on the State.
Religious teachings throughout the ages indicate that marriage is the union of a man and a woman for the purposes of procreation.
I have nothing whatsoever against same sex 'unions' authorised by the State but to call it 'marriage' is just wrong IMHO.
To say that it creates 'second class citizens' if same sex couples are not allowed to 'marry' is ridiculous.
And as to Cameron saying that a Church will have the right to refuse a same sex marriage is a cop-out. Just wait for the first case of refusal to be heard in the ECHR.
The most recent case of something similar was, of course, the B&B couple who refused a bed to a same sex couple because it was against their religious beliefs. The B&B lost their case and it cost them dear.
Let's hope the Lords Spiritual have their way and manage to persuade their Borther Peers that this is just totally wrong and not demean the honourable and lasting durable state of Marriage and all that it entails and that this mischief making by Cameron is consigned to 'round objects'.
Cameron knows exactly where this will lead. It is no secret that a fair proportion of Tory MP's are not happy about this bill and will vote against it later. Cameron knows that if this bill is passed with his promise that the church will be able to abstain from marrying gay couples,the court of human rights will say that is illegal in that they cannot stop gay couples from being married in a church. As we already know Cameron and any future PM cannot over ride Europe's decision's on such matters. A gay couple with Stonewalls backing will challenge this law before the year is out, through Europe's own courts.
Can anyone here see Europe upholding that law where churches can deny a gay couple the right to marry in church?
I am against gay marriage as a lot of the general public appear to be, and rather a lot of Tory backbenchers. I have no issue with gay civil ceremony's at all but I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman. To be against this new law would seem that I fall into the 'old fashioned ' line of thought. Well so be it.
I have made no secret of the fact that I hope the Lords reject it.
No, not at all nw-c.
It just shows how much a mucking fuddle the whole thing is but offering same sex couples a 'marriage' with the sanctity and blessing of the Church won't make it right.
Those oppossed are just relics of the past. What the hell does it really matter, it two people who love each other want to show that commitment in the house of GOD.
There is no actual mention anywhere in the bible about gay relationships !! However it does in very strong words condem and totally oppose second marriages in a church !!! How can the church or religious zealots openly accept and welcome people who
re-marry...and yet oppose the fact that two people of the same sex wish to get married.
The bill will pass, with the support of the labour party and the Lib-dems.....and so it should. Equality is for all....not just hetro-sexuals !!
But will it get past the 'fuddy duddies' in The Lords dean?
Well, it got past the MPs with a clear majority.
Now wait for the bunfight in The Lords
Is anyone actually aware of the House of Lords reforms at all?
Have a Google at that one, and see that there are actually ELECTED members. Maybe not elected by the general public, but elected all the same. Is being elected by someone for something not democratic now then?
The history of the House of Lords in all seriousness, is well worth a read.
Excellent.
IIRC the right to vote is not a human right, it is a Crown bestowed right. Consequently the Crown can withdraw the right provided it is within the legal framework of the country. I could be wrong, and if I am then someone will no doubt correct me before too long.
