ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums

ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/index.php)
-   Serious Debates & News (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=61)
-   -   Equal Marriage Debate & Vote [LIVE NOW on BBC Parliament] (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showthread.php?t=220686)

Omah 06-02-2013 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy (Post 5816919)
Meant to quote joey, I assume that is all that is confusing you?

No ..... what do you mean by "weight of public opinion" ?

Omah 06-02-2013 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 5816895)
This issue has caused more members to leave the Conservative Party than any other single issue in years. If David Cameron made this into an issue to make himself more popular with the electorate, he's done it at the expense of a lot of his core voters. Gay marriage wasn't in the manifesto... it wasn't in any party's manifesto, and personally I think it was a smoke-screen to deflect attention from the other countless issues that are going against the Tories at the moment. I'm not saying I'm against gay marriage or that it's a bad thing, only that this is going to cost the Conservatives dear at the next election and probably the party who will benefit will be UKIP.

Yeah, definitely, a "smokescreen" or distraction from the real issues that are affecting most of the electorate.

Omah 06-02-2013 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nedusa (Post 5816920)
The vast majority of people in this country will applaud David Cameron for the personal risk he took to his political career and reputation in order to push through such a much needed and much overdue change to our laws.

"The vast majority of people in this country" couldn't care less about "such a much needed and much overdue change to our laws"

Quote:

This is what voters will remember in two years time .
No, they won't.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21339877

Anthony Wells, YouGov associate director

Quote:

However much attention it is getting in the media at the moment, gay marriage is not the sort of issue that will have a big impact on people's votes come the general election when, as usual, people's votes will be decided upon the bigger issues.

Polls claiming to show that it will change a large number of votes are because the question asked singles out just that one issue. By May 2015, (when the election is due) gay marriage will have been on the statute book for two years and will be broadly accepted. More importantly, it will fade to insignificance next to bigger issues like the economy, health, crime and the merits of the party leaders.
Our most recent polling shows only 7% of people say that gay marriage would be an important issue in deciding their vote, and they are evenly split between people who support and oppose the issue.
The more important impact will be on how the Conservative party is perceived: in or out of touch, modern or stuck in the past, or - as our present polling and today's vote suggests - just hopelessly divided.

Kizzy 06-02-2013 07:16 PM

Let me start again....

175 votes were cast against this bill and 136 of those votes came from the Conservative party,that is actually 10 more than supported the bill.
So I cannot see the Conservative party reaping any great support from the voters as to this one although I do agree David Cameron's standing will likely have risen with them and so it should,he made a brave decision in going ahead on this issue in my opinion

Due to the weight of public opinion what choice did he have?

Omah 06-02-2013 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy (Post 5816967)
Let me start again....

175 votes were cast against this bill and 136 of those votes came from the Conservative party,that is actually 10 more than supported the bill.
So I cannot see the Conservative party reaping any great support from the voters as to this one although I do agree David Cameron's standing will likely have risen with them and so it should,he made a brave decision in going ahead on this issue in my opinion

Due to the weight of public opinion what choice did he have?

Since you have not answered the question, let me repeat :

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 5816954)
What do you mean by "weight of public opinion" ?


Jack_ 06-02-2013 07:26 PM

centuries of oppression and decades of campaigning and it's not a 'big issue'. lul.

Kizzy 06-02-2013 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 5816971)
Since you have not answered the question, let me repeat :

The opinion of the LGBT christians campaigning and also the public backing them in support of the issue.

Omah 06-02-2013 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 5816980)
centuries of oppression and decades of campaigning and it's not a 'big issue'. lul.

That's what most of the electorate seem to think.

:idc:

Omah 06-02-2013 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy (Post 5816983)
The opinion of the LGBT christians campaigning and also the public backing them in support of the issue.

That's not "the weight of public opinion" - how many of the electorate constitute "the public backing the LGBT christians" ......:conf:

Nedusa 06-02-2013 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 5816964)
"The vast majority of people in this country" couldn't care less about "such a much needed and much overdue change to our laws"



No, they won't.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21339877

Anthony Wells, YouGov associate director

Thanks for your rather detailed reply, you show some interesting points but my views are my views so I guess time will tell.... !!!

Jack_ 06-02-2013 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 5816984)
That's what most of the electorate seem to think.

:idc:

Most of the electorate aren't lesbian, gay, bisexual or transsexual.

And to be quite honest, on this issue I couldn't give a toss how much support it has received from the rest of the population or opinion polls on the matter, it's an important, progressive and long overdue piece of legislation that a minority group have waited and fought for centuries to have passed. Yes there are many other issues facing the coalition, but this bill I'm afraid cannot be put off any longer.

The interests of an oppressed and unequal minority come before anybody or anything else on this matter.

Kizzy 06-02-2013 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 5816990)
That's not "the weight of public opinion" - how many of the electorate constitute "the public backing the LGBT christians" ......:conf:

I disagree... what do you constitute a 'weight of public opinion' if it is not manifested as support for an issue?
:conf: :conf:

MTVN 06-02-2013 08:08 PM

It seems though that contrary to what you said this wasn't something Cameron was forced into doing because of overwhelming public demand

Kizzy 06-02-2013 08:29 PM

Oh I don't think he was forced either, although I do believe there is overwhelming public support for and this countered the MP's who were against.

Omah 06-02-2013 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy (Post 5817069)
Oh I don't think he was forced either, although I do believe there is overwhelming public support for and this countered the MP's who were against.

So where is this "overwhelming suppport", who are is constituents and what are their numbers ?

You have singularly failed to provide any evidence of such support - IMO, that is because there never was any - most of the electorate have other fish to fry.

Omah 06-02-2013 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 5817008)
Most of the electorate aren't lesbian, gay, bisexual or transsexual.

True

Quote:

And to be quite honest, on this issue I couldn't give a toss how much support it has received from the rest of the population or opinion polls on the matter
That's a rather selfish of you.

Quote:

It's an important, progressive and long overdue piece of legislation that a minority group have waited and fought for centuries to have passed.
I am somewhat confused over this grandiose claim, since the Women's suffrage movement in the United Kingdom only took 98 years to achive its main aim - the right to vote on the same terms as men.

Quote:

The interests of an oppressed and unequal minority come before anybody or anything else on this matter.
Well, that's precisely why the rest of the electorate think otherwise ..... :pipe:

Livia 06-02-2013 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nedusa (Post 5816920)
Yes I agree he has suffered slightly more than he would have expected, he probably thought he would have more Tory MP's voting for the Bill than was the case. However I still maintain he will weather the storm within his own party and as they say time is a great healer. The vast majority of people in this country will applaud David Cameron for the personal risk he took to his political career and reputation in order to push through such a much needed and much overdue change to our laws. This is what voters will remember in two years time and although I do think UKIP will take an increased share of the vote I think the main battle will be between Miliband and Cameron and I think Cameron will have the edge entirely because of bills like this one and the offer of a referendum on Europe. People see him as a politician with a conscience and not just a figurehead at the top of the Tory machine.

I agree that it has given Cameron a better rep in some areas, but sadly not with the people that are likely to vote for him. The core Tory voters are turning in their membership cards in droves. He didn't get a majority at the last general election and he certainly won't next time. Many Conservative supporters have stated their intention of backing UKIP and that will split the Tory vote. The last time there was sizeable rebellion amongst Conservative members where people actually left the party was the cutting of the armed forces, but that pales into insignificance when put up against the rebellion over gay marriage. If it was a big issue to any of the parties it should have been in their manifesto, as it wasn't I can only conclude that is it, like I said earlier, a smoke-screen to deflect attention away from the other burning issues of the day. Suggesting people now see him as a politician with a conscience shows how this issue has deflected from benefit cuts, the NHS, fuel costs, the economy... all the other things that would have been in the news if gay marriage hadn't been on the agenda.

Kizzy 06-02-2013 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 5817245)
So where is this "overwhelming suppport", who are is constituents and what are their numbers ?

You have singularly failed to provide any evidence of such support - IMO, that is because there never was any - most of the electorate have other fish to fry.

Well maybe over the next few days some statistics may come to light....we can only hope eh? :pipe:

Jack_ 06-02-2013 11:03 PM

Decades then Omah, there's no need to be pedantic.

Here's a column from The Independent, written by Owen Jones, who explains just how much LGBT people have had to go through to get to this stage. It is not just an issue that can be brushed aside to suit the largely apathetic and straight electorate's other concerns; for people who have been at the forefront of the battle for equality, those who have personally experienced the hardship of this campaign, this is an important step towards eradicating homophobia and giving them the freedom and opportunity to legally marry someone they love. To suggest that we should further postpone this legislation is an insult to those who have had to wait far, far too long for this day to come.

Quote:

Equal marriage: As we celebrate, let's not forget those who fought to get us here
And countless centuries of bigotry haven't disappeared with one fell swoop

Just over 40 years ago, Britain’s first gay rights march ended in Trafalgar Square, half a mile away from where MPs yesterday voted in support of equal marriage. These few hundred courageous demonstrators – popularly regarded as perverts, *****, deviants – were outnumbered by up to twice as many police officers.

As Tottenham Labour MP David Lammy reminded the House, Parliamentarians once looked the other way when policemen beat gay protesters. What progress has been made, when the last legal hurdle faced by same-sex lovers is cast aside – and when a (partly) Conservative government is in power.

There is no doubting that yesterday’s vote was a historic moment. We are finally at the end of the legal emancipation of LGBT people, a process that only began in 1967 with the decriminalisation of homosexuality. Centuries of state-sanctioned prejudice have been obliterated in the last 40 years: some of the last set of laws denying full rights to a minority are now being overcome. But, as ever, it was not the goodwill and generosity of those above that brought us here, but rather the struggle and sacrifice of countless LGBT people who were spat at, ridiculed, demonised, beaten and imprisoned.

Not that countless centuries of bigotry have simply vanished; their death rattle echoed in the Chamber. Tory MP Peter Bone described it as his “saddest day” in the House, claiming a lack of democratic legitimacy for a policy that polls show has majority support.

Sir Gerald Howarth frothed at the mouth, damning the lack of “mandate for this massive cultural change”. The DUP’s Ian Paisley – the son of a man who once launched a campaign to “Save Ulster From Sodomy” – suggested that the ability of same-sex couples to marry would drive straight people away from the altar: MPs laughed at him, and rightly so. And Sir Roger Gale – fulfilling the role of cardboard cut-out, clichéd bigot – compared being gay to incest. The 17th century called, Sir Roger, and they want their speech back.

Tragically, a handful of Labour MPs joined Tory protests at history’s unstoppable march. Stephen Timms affirmed he would vote against the Bill at Third Reading, suggesting that marriage was about children: at a stroke, apparently annulling the marriages of countless childless couples. His fellow Newham Labour MP, Lyn Brown, wondered – having wed too late to have children – if her marriage was therefore not legitimate.

It was refuseniks such as Timms who stopped Labour imposing a three-line Whip on this vote by threatening to resign: Labour’s official view is that civil rights are a matter of individual conscience.

More movingly, some MPs gave an insight into the hardship caused by prejudice. “Progress has come in fits and starts and has not always been easy,” said gay Lib Dem MP Stephen Williams. Tory MP Nick Herbert spoke of gay children bullied in schools and athletes who would not come out. “They have civil partnerships, why do they need it to be called marriage?” demanded critics who would be reduced to rage if their own relationships were called anything else. “This is how it has always been,” they argued, refusing to accept that traditions can sometimes be injustices that have prevailed for too long.

They were schooled with a potted history of marriage by Yvette Cooper: of how women were once mere objects, granted by fathers to their husbands; of civil non-religious marriages – once a huge, controversial innovation – being introduced in 1836; of women still legally being able to be raped by their husbands until the early 1990s.

And so yesterday was not simply about the right of same-sex couples to be legally accepted. It was not simply the acceptance that love is love – with its excitement, warmth, companionship, fear and heartbreak – whatever the gender of those involved. It was about the state finally recognising that LGBT people are the same as anyone else.

That does not mean complacency: homophobic abuse will still be yelled at same-sex couples; young LGBT men and women will still be consumed with self-loathing and terror; and yes, LGBT people will still be punched, kicked. Yet we have come so far, and, in the years to come, homophobia will continue its inevitable retreat. But don’t get too grateful for those Parliamentarians. It was huge sacrifice that got us here. Never forget it.
Source

Also, another great speech from yesterday's debate:


Omah 06-02-2013 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy (Post 5817025)
I disagree... what do you constitute a 'weight of public opinion' if it is not manifested as support for an issue?
:conf: :conf:

You said "THE weight of public opinion", which, if I understand English idioms correctly, means the preponderance, usually the pronounced preponderance, of a public (i.e. of the people as a whole) judgement or view ..... there is patently no evidence for your assertion on the extent of public feeling on this issue.

Omah 06-02-2013 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy (Post 5817291)
Well maybe over the next few days some statistics may come to light....we can only hope eh? :pipe:

YOU can hope, I have other fish to fry ..... ;)

Jack_ 06-02-2013 11:07 PM

And just as an extra to my post...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 5817259)
Well, that's precisely why the rest of the electorate think otherwise ..... :pipe:

Well of course they would, because they're not an oppressed and unequal minority. That speaks for itself really :pipe:

Kizzy 06-02-2013 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 5817296)
YOU can hope, I have other fish to fry ..... ;)

Cheers! :thumbs:

Omah 06-02-2013 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 5817293)
Decades then Omah, there's no need to be pedantic.

Here's a column from The Independent, written by Owen Jones, who explains just how much LGBT people have had to go through to get to this stage. It is not just an issue that can be brushed aside to suit the largely apathetic and straight electorate's other concerns; for people who have been at the forefront of the battle for equality, those who have personally experienced the hardship of this campaign, this is an important step towards eradicating homophobia and giving them the freedom and opportunity to legally marry someone they love. To suggest that we should further postpone this legislation is an insult to those who have had to wait far, far too long for this day to come.



Source

Also, another great speech from yesterday's debate:


I thought the topic of this thread was gay marriage not gay rights in general - if you want to discuss that complex issue then I suggest you open another thread - I will happily join you there to tell you how I did my bit for the cause in days of yore ..... :pipe:

Omah 06-02-2013 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 5817298)
Well of course they would, because they're not an oppressed and unequal minority. That speaks for itself really :pipe:

Of course it does - we live in a democracy where an oppressed and unequal minority has won substantial rights but where the interests of the majority hold sway.

:idc:


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.