Gay marriage 'to be legalised in the UK by 2015', says government

[Shaun]

The government has indicated it is committed to changing the law to allow gay marriage by 2015.

Ministers are to launch a consultation next spring on how to open up civil marriage to same-sex couples ahead of the next general election.

Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone told the Lib Dem autumn conference that current laws were "simply not fair".

The leadership of both coalition parties back the move but it is likely to anger some Conservative activists.

And gay rights campaigners have urged the government to act immediately, saying existing laws are discriminatory and a consultation is unnecessary.

At the moment, only men and women are permitted to get married while civil partnerships, which became law in 2005, are limited to same-sex couples.

Civil partnerships give same-sex couples the right to the same legal treatment across a range of matters as married couples but the law does not allow such unions to be referred to as marriages.

Ms Featherstone told Lib Dem activists that a public consultation will begin in March 2012 with a view to changing the law ahead of the next general election scheduled for May 2015.

"Britain must not be complacent," she said. "We are a world leader for gay rights but there is still more we must do."

While civil partnerships were a "welcome first step", she said the party was committed to confronting "prejudice and discrimination in all its forms".

Heralding the proposed change as a Lib Dem policy, she added: "To deny one group of people the same opportunities available to another is not simply discriminatory. It is simply not fair."

Ministers have said the government is determined to listen to "all those who have an interest in the area to understand their views".

However, the consultation will not consider whether to allow same-sex couples to have religious marriages or to open up civil partnerships to men and women.

The Lib Dems have long campaigned for reform of the marriage laws, arguing that they are outdated and discriminate against same-sex couples.

Conservative leader David Cameron backed the move while in opposition as part of his modernising drive and the pledge to permit equal marriage was included in the party's 2010 election manifesto.

However, some Conservative MPs and activists are likely to be uncomfortable with the move.

And veteran gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell said the government had delayed the consultation - which campaigners had expected to start last June.

"I am not convinced that there needs to be any consultation at all," he said. "The ban on same-sex marriage is homophobic discrimination and should be repealed."

And he said same-sex couples should be allowed to wed in churches and other religious buildings, arguing that some faith organisations had expressly asked to be able to conduct same-sex ceremonies.

He added: "It is an insult to people of faith for the equality minister to rule out any repeal of the ban on religious organisations conducting same-sex marriages."

New rules set to come into force early next year will allow religious premises to hold civil partnership ceremonies. The move is voluntary and religious organisations will not be obliged to do so.

A group of British couples are challenging the existing ban on gay marriages and heterosexual civil partnerships and plan to take the case to the European Court of Justice.

New York became the largest US state to date to legalise gay marriage earlier this year. Same-sex marriage is legal in six states and Washington DC.

Good news, but overshadowed by a lot of walking around on eggshells it seems.

[Chuck]

I read this on DailyMail and the comments in favour of it were all red arrowed. :bored:

[Tom]

So really they're just changing the name from 'civil partnership' to 'gay marriage' because neither church will let it happen and ultimately they can't be governed. The Pope would never allow it but CofE might allow it when Queen Lizzie & Charlie both die.

[Locke.]

I thought it was already legal :suspect:

[Marc]

It's just wrong that they can't already, I agree with Shaun.

[Chuck]

That's something I've always wondered, what's the difference between gay marriage and civil partnership. D:

[Marc]

I thought it was already legal :suspect:

No you and Novo must wait :nono:

[Saph]

I thought it was legal aswell :s my dads uncle and his husband have been married for years, as long as I can remember, and im sure they got married in the UK :suspect:

[Livia]

Many religions will not marry a man and a woman if one of them is divorced. I can't see them allowing same-sex couples to marry in church (or synagogue, or temple or wherever...) any time soon. Unless a same-sex couple are religious I don't see why it would matter anyway. Of course gay couples should be allowed to marry in civil ceremonies. If they love each other, who could argue with that?

[Locke.]

No you and Novo must wait :nono:

Novo shall be marrying JedwardFever once it's legal.

I'm more of a Pixie Lott sort of guy.

[Jordan.]

I read this on DailyMail and the comments in favour of it were all red arrowed. :bored:

These are the same people who red arrow nice comments about Cher Lloyd, pure monsters.

[Marc]

Novo shall be marrying JedwardFever once it's legal.

I'm more of a Pixie Lott sort of guy.

:laugh:

[Shasown]

More bloody pandering to the minorities, why cant straight people have a civil partnership?

No religious organisation can be forced to marry any couple if the couple fall outside of the eligilibity for marriage in the eyes of that faith, all the government will be doing is saying if the religious organisation wishes to allow same sex couples to marry the ban a past government imposed will be llifted.

[Chuck]

-glares at ElProximo-

[Shasown]

-glares at ElProximo-

Thank you very much chuck, now you have blown my disguise, curses foiled again!!!!!

[Shaun]

I agree that straight people should be allowed to have a civil partnership. (the difference from my perspective is that marriage is a religious commitment and civil partnerships are for legal reasons (financial benefits, etc.) - although I think there are still some inequalities between the two, and marriages offer more securities). I've no real desire to get married, but that might change when I get older and I still see no reason why I shouldn't be allowed to marry a bloke (other than if it was against his will :tongue:)

[Ninastar]

this is exciting.

[_Seth]

****ing finally.

[Patrick]

Why the **** are Christian and Syed planning a wedding then!?

[Patrick]

These are the same people who red arrow nice comments about Cher Lloyd, pure monsters.

:joker::joker:

[Shasown]

Why the **** are Christian and Syed planning a wedding then!?

Because thats a soap patrick its not a fly on the wall documentary.

Its easier to type wedding than civil partnership ceremony in the script.

[CaraRawr]

Great news :)

[lostalex]

It;s certainly a step in the right direction, but having gay marriage has nothing to do with a country's homophobia. Mexico is one of the most homophobic countries in the world and it has legalized gay marriages. Countries with gay marriage like Canada or Holland even have horrible problems with homophobia.

Just making the laws equal of course won't eliminate the real problem which is a sociological problem of homophobia.

The real problem is str8 male apartheid, which exists in all countries. Until we eliminate str8 male apartheid, homophobia and feminism are both lost causes.

Str8 men are a minority, but they have the majority of power in business and government. That is apartheid.

[Tom]

It;s certainly a step in the right direction, but having gay marriage has nothing to do with a country's homophobia. Mexico is one of the most homophobic countries in the world and it has legalized gay marriages. Countries with gay marriage like Canada or Holland even have horrible problems with homophobia.

Just making the laws equal of course won't eliminate the real problem which is a sociological problem of homophobia.

The real problem is str8 male apartheid, which exists in all countries. Until we eliminate str8 male apartheid, homophobia and feminism are both lost causes.

Str8 men are a minority, but they have the majority of power in business and government. That is apartheid.

But straight men are the biggest minority and men having more power in business and government is because men aren't as attached emotionally as women are. You can't have a heart so to speak in those professions. Thats why the majority of people who work in public sectors like healthcare and education are women

[Pyramid*]

But straight men are the biggest minority and men having more power in business and government is because men aren't as attached emotionally as women are. You can't have a heart so to speak in those professions. Thats why the majority of people who work in public sectors like healthcare and education are women


And also why the woman who do reach powerful positions, are regarded as cold hearted, callous bitches.

Civil partnerships are recognised in Scotland for straights as long as they have been together 2 years. Don't know how it works down south.

If two people want to be legally committed to one another: then surely in this day and age, why should that matter to anyone other than the 2 people concerned. It doesn't affect anyone else bar those two people, religion causes as much bother as it 'solves' at times, it really does.

[letmein]

But straight men are the biggest minority and men having more power in business and government is because men aren't as attached emotionally as women are. You can't have a heart so to speak in those professions. Thats why the majority of people who work in public sectors like healthcare and education are women

1950 is calling, hon. They want you back. :xyxwave:

[letmein]

Anyway, no gay people cannot get married in the UK at the moment. They can get a domestic partnership. No country should be fine with separate-but-equal status. Maybe that's just an American thing. Anyway, unless you're married, other countries will no recognize you when it comes to many services. They don't understand the concept of a domestic partnership. Elton John found this out the hard way.

For the last time, marriage is not a religious concept. Religions do practice it, but they don't own it. It has always been a legality, and goes back to the beginning of time. It was not religious, and even a century ago, women were property. It had nothing to do with god, or love.

Oh Shasown, it must be so hard not being a minority!

[Shasown]

Anyway, no gay people cannot get married in the UK at the moment. They can get a domestic partnership. No country should be fine with separate-but-equal status. Maybe that's just an American thing. Anyway, unless you're married, other countries will no recognize you when it comes to many services. They don't understand the concept of a domestic partnership. Elton John found this out the hard way.

For the last time, marriage is not a religious concept. Religions do practice it, but they don't own it. It has always been a legality, and goes back to the beginning of time. It was not religious, and even a century ago, women were property. It had nothing to do with god, or love.

Oh Shasown, it must be so hard not being a minority!

So America allows gay marriages in all states?

I would say religion came about before laws, even if it was just man bowing to the rising sun for returning each day.

Its not hard at all, but it must be even harder not understanding humour.

[Pyramid*]

Anyway, no gay people cannot get married in the UK at the moment. They can get a domestic partnership. No country should be fine with separate-but-equal status. Maybe that's just an American thing. Anyway, unless you're married, other countries will no recognize you when it comes to many services. They don't understand the concept of a domestic partnership. Elton John found this out the hard way.

For the last time, marriage is not a religious concept. Religions do practice it, but they don't own it. It has always been a legality, and goes back to the beginning of time. It was not religious, and even a century ago, women were property. It had nothing to do with god, or love.

Oh Shasown, it must be so hard not being a minority!

Double negative, totally negates what you are 'trying' to say - so no point in reading the rest of your post really, if it's more of the same.

[Stu]

letmein being unbearably annoying in debates as usual, totally undermining whatever points he has to make.

[arista]

No you and Novo must wait :nono:


Spiffing

[Tom]

1950 is calling, hon. They want you back. :xyxwave:

Its nothing to do with being stuck in the 1950s. Theres more demand for those kinds of jobs by men rather than women just like female dominated jobs have little interest from men. Women can and do get there if they want to but on the whole they just don't want to in the first place.

[Shaun]

letmein seems to live on a planet where us gays skip around merrily and everyone who whispers something vaguely contentious about the homosexual demographic is imprisoned immediately.

[lostalex]

letmein seems to live on a planet where us gays skip around merrily and everyone who whispers something vaguely contentious about the homosexual demographic is imprisoned immediately.

well you're joking, but it's not as ridiculous an idea as you may think. The middle east, africa, south asia and parts of south america, this is the reality. Well not necessarily imprissoned, in fact prison would be ideal compared to the fate most would face.

I can't think of any parts of the world were str8 people face that threat just for being straight.... can you?

[Black Dagger]

I thought it was already legal :suspect:

So did I... oh how out of synch I am...

[Livia]

letmein seems to live on a planet where us gays skip around merrily and everyone who whispers something vaguely contentious about the homosexual demographic is imprisoned immediately.

Some people like to suffer for their sexuality, instead of embracing and celebrating it. Nothing worse than a tub-thumper.

[Cromwell1900]

1. Gay People should have civil Partnerships
2. Straight People should have civil Partnerships
3. Religious Straights should have weddings
4. God only knows what Gay Religious couples should have.


1. Why do gays want recognition from an institution that wants to punish them for their way of life. That injustice floods the Church and some of the more thinking Clurgy find obscure justifications to show that Religion is not Homophobic, which it clearly is, and a split in the Church grows. Gay people are revealing inconsistences within the Bible and Our Modern way of Life with their insistence on Marriage. Well done Lads & Lasses you go.....

2. This is where the Governments focus should be to equalize the rights of a Wedded couple and a Civil Partnership.

3. There's no reason why Religious people should not be treated equally than the rest of us, and if they want their Traditional Church do then it's fine by me

4. Assuming any Religious Gays exist which i would find hard to fathom, i would suggest instead of marriage, the kind of assistance a battered wife who stays with her Beating Husband receives.

[Niall]

Thank God. I'm glad they're actually going to make it equal rather than the kinda-sorta-equal-but-not-equal crap they got going on at the moment. I actually want to get married at some point in the future and have a family, so.

[lostalex]

1. Gay People should have civil Partnerships
2. Straight People should have civil Partnerships
3. Religious Straights should have weddings
4. God only knows what Gay Religious couples should have.


1. Why do gays want recognition from an institution that wants to punish them for their way of life. That injustice floods the Church and some of the more thinking Clurgy find obscure justifications to show that Religion is not Homophobic, which it clearly is, and a split in the Church grows. Gay people are revealing inconsistences within the Bible and Our Modern way of Life with their insistence on Marriage. Well done Lads & Lasses you go.....

2. This is where the Governments focus should be to equalize the rights of a Wedded couple and a Civil Partnership.

3. There's no reason why Religious people should not be treated equally than the rest of us, and if they want their Traditional Church do then it's fine by me

4. Assuming any Religious Gays exist which i would find hard to fathom, i would suggest instead of marriage, the kind of assistance a battered wife who stays with her Beating Husband receives.

Well that's the irony of the whole thing isn't it, because gay people can already get married in churches, and huge numbers do. There are plenty of churches that perform gay marriages, and gay people are religious just like str8s.

We are talking about the government though. Gay people can already get married in churches, and always have done. It's only the Government that doesn't recognize the marriages.

God has always recognized gay marriage.

God has never been the the problem, the problem has always been the government.

[Shasown]

Well that's the irony of the whole thing isn't it, because gay people can already get married in churches, and huge numbers do. There are plenty of churches that perform gay marriages, and gay people are religious just like str8s.

We are talking about the government though. Gay people can already get married in churches, and always have done. It's only the Government that doesn't recognize the marriages.

God has always recognized gay marriage.

God has never been the the problem, the problem has always been the government.

Interesting perspective.

But does God actually recognise any marriage? Have gay people always got married in church? When was that then?

[lostalex]

Interesting perspective.

But does God actually recognise any marriage? Have gay people always got married in church? When was that then?

There are hundreds of thousands of gay marriages performed by unitarians and other spiritual ceremonies performed every year.

Gay people have never had a problem with God allowing them to get married. God has never stopped anyone from getting married. It's only the government not recognizing those marriages that is the problem.

Gay Marriage was never about religion, it's always been about politics.

[Shasown]

There are hundreds of thousands of gay marriages performed by unitarians and other spiritual ceremonies performed every year.

Gay people have never had a problem with God allowing them to get married. God has never stopped anyone from getting married. It's only the government not recognizing those marriages that is the problem.

Gay Marriage was never about religion, it's always been about politics.

So these unitarian and spiritual ceremonies have always been performed?

I know God has never stopped anyone from getting married, my point is has God ever shown he recognises either gay or straight marriages? I may be wrong but I dont think he has ever turned up with a toaster or anything for the happy couple has he?

I think Gay Marriage is a little bit about religion, I think lots of gays would love the religions they follow to openly accept them in the true spirit of the religion. You know loving thy neighbour as thyself etc.

[MTVN]

I don't see how you can say Gay Marriage is nothing to do with religion or God when you have the Catholic Church completely against the idea and campaigning to prevent it

[lostalex]

I don't see how you can say Gay Marriage is nothing to do with religion or God when you have the Catholic Church completely against the idea and campaigning to prevent it

And there are plenty of athiests against str8 marriage, does that mean that str8 people arn't really married? Of course not.

Different communities and religions have different belieefs, it doesn't matter what ANOTHER religion thinks, it only matter what you believe.

However the GOVERNMENT decisions affect EVERYONE. The catholic church doesn't affect EVERYONE. The catholic church doesn't even affect all catholics. The catholic church has no power over anyone at all. The government DOES have power over everyone.

[Chuck]

I believe you're underestimating the influence the Catholic Church has on society and it's influence on politics.

[Shasown]

And there are plenty of athiests against str8 marriage, does that mean that str8 people arn't really married? Of course not.

Different communities and religions have different belieefs, it doesn't matter what ANOTHER religion thinks, it only matter what you believe.

However the GOVERNMENT decisions affect EVERYONE. The catholic church doesn't affect EVERYONE. The catholic church doesn't even affect all catholics.

Do these atheists actively campaign to have marriage banned? Like some leaders of faiths are campaigning to keep gay marriages banned?

It matters if you follow a particular faith that wont allow you to marry the partner of your choice in your church of choice.

There is no such thing as "the government", there are governments. As much as the US likes to think it rules the world, honestly it doesnt.

While the Holy See does not affect all catholics those not strictly adhering to the rules set by Rome cannot really claim to be true followers of the Roman Catholic Church can they?

[Niamh.]

I believe you're underestimating the influence the Catholic Church has on society and it's influence on politics.

Depends what country you're in I reckon, it hasn't got a whole lot of power in most countries anymore, not even here and we were hugely controlled by them up till quite recently

[Chuck]

But isn't religion the main reason many western countries haven't legalized Gay Marriage yet? It seems to me many politicians are just afraid they'll lose votes if they do something that many believe it's against their religion.

[MTVN]

And there are plenty of athiests against str8 marriage, does that mean that str8 people arn't really married? Of course not.

Different communities and religions have different belieefs, it doesn't matter what ANOTHER religion thinks, it only matter what you believe.

However the GOVERNMENT decisions affect EVERYONE. The catholic church doesn't affect EVERYONE. The catholic church doesn't even affect all catholics. The catholic church has no power over anyone at all. The government DOES have power over everyone.

Kinda flies in the face of your "God had no problem with Gay Marriage" claim which is a pretty bizarre statement really; like it or not the Catholic Church is the biggest Christian Church in the world and it's madness to think that Christian opposition is just an irrelevancy in the whole debate

[Shasown]

Depends what country you're in I reckon, it hasn't got a whole lot of power in most countries anymore, not even here and we were hugely controlled by them up till quite recently

It may not have the social power it used to have, but even if Gay marriages are legalised in the UK, if Rome doesnt change its stance, there will be no gay marriages in RC churches or performed by RC priests.

In time they may allow blessings of marriages to be carried out like they did with divorcees a few years.

And I cant say Sayed and Christian being allowed to partake of a Muslim Wedding either in the next few hundred years.

[Niamh.]

It may not have the social power it used to have, but even if Gay marriages are legalised in the UK, if Rome doesnt change its stance, there will be no gay marriages in RC churches or performed by RC priests.

In time they may allow blessings of marriages to be carried out like they did with divorcees a few years.

And I cant say Sayed and Christian being allowed to partake of a Muslim Wedding either in the next few hundred years.

True.

[brian3]

what always dont understand is the fact that a lot of the left wing people who campaign for gay marriage. Are the very same people who also say that marraige is a outdated institution that should be got rid of. Make up your mind

[lostalex]

I don't think any gay campaigners are asking for every church to have to perform gay marriages. It's only about the government.

It would be like going to a Muslim mosque and demanding that they perform an exorcism on you. Well muslim mosques won't do that for you, because they don't believe in exorcism. If you want an exorcism, you have to go to a catholic priest.

I don't think gay people have a problem with some churches not performing gay marriages, we have a problem with the government not recognizing gay marriages from the churches that DO perform gay marriage.

[lostalex]

what always dont understand is the fact that a lot of the left wing people who campaign for gay marriage. Are the very same people who also say that marraige is a outdated institution that should be got rid of. Make up your mind

I think they are asking for equality, not necessarily marriage. They are saying, eigther you acknowledge all marriages, or you acknowledge NO marriages. I know lots of people who would like the government to not acknowledge any marriage. Why should the government be involved with a religious institution at all? But if they allow it for str8 people, then they should allow it for gay people.

It's not really about marriage, or religion. It's about treating all people the same under the law. Equal rights.

[letmein]

It may not have the social power it used to have, but even if Gay marriages are legalised in the UK, if Rome doesnt change its stance, there will be no gay marriages in RC churches or performed by RC priests.

In time they may allow blessings of marriages to be carried out like they did with divorcees a few years.

And I cant say Sayed and Christian being allowed to partake of a Muslim Wedding either in the next few hundred years.

No one cares about churches marrying gay people. This is the government. Cults can pretend their working with god from now until the cows come home. No1currs about them. They don't run society.

[Jords]

I always thought a Civil Partnership was the equivelant :laugh:

Can straight people have CP's too?

[Niall]

I always thought a Civil Partnership was the equivelant :laugh:

Can straight people have CP's too?

I don't think they can, no. :suspect:

[Jords]

Straightophobic :nono:

[Niall]

Straightophobic :nono:

*Heterophobic. ;)

But yeah I think they're gonna make straight civil partnerships legal and gay marriages legal at the same time. :suspect:

[lostalex]

Civil Partnerships are the equivelent of Seperate but equal. CP's are the 21st century version of separate drinking fountains for "coloreds".