David Cameron is on the right side of history on equal marriage

December 10, 2012 10:26 am

“I agree with David Cameron.”

It’s not a sentence that comes easily to Labour supporters, but in the coming months, on one particular issue, it’s one that I’m going to have to familiarise myself with.

David Cameron is right on Gay Marriage. Completely right. Unequivocally right.

Bringing equality to the institution of marriage is not only the morally right thing to do (and places Cameron on the right side of history on this issue), he’s also right that marriage in churches should be legal if the church itself wishes to conduct same-sex marriages. No-one should (or could) be forced to conduct a marriage they are against, but at the same time, religious same sex marriages should be allowed if some churches/religions are enlightened enough to conduct them. It’s a sensible policy all round, and also – pleasingly – is the right thing to do.

He deserves praise and cross party support for that, which I’m sure he’ll receive.

Of course it would be all too easy to make light of Cameron’s correctness on this score – to say that “even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day”. We could spend hours listing all of the mistakes he has made, and all of the odious, backwards and, yes, homophobic statements that some Tories have come out with. And that would be diverting, and point scoring and in some ways revealing.

But it would also be completely unfair.

Similarly, it would be easy too to argue that Cameron is taking such a stand on gay marriage because of potential electoral benefits. Indeed his key strategist (and sometime Chancellor) has made just that argument. Or we could argue that Cameron is picking a fight with his party to look more moderate, although surely there are dozens of issues that he could have chosen for such a task (and I remain unconvinced that taking such a stance on equal marriage will materially change the Tory vote at the next election).

Instead, this looks like something that Cameron sincerely wants to do. And something which he is making a brave and considered stand on.

More than that, it seems to be a conviction of his that it needs to be done. From a man who all too often seems to blow in the wind where conviction is concerned, this seems more solid and deeper rooted than we’ve come to expect from the Prime Minister. He is standing up to those who argue that some people have no right to take part in the institution of marriage because of their sexuality. And although his support for equal marriage builds on a decade of gay rights legislation from Labour, that should not diminish the power of what he is doing. There is nothing wrong with building on the achievements of others. All politicians have stood on the shoulders of giants at one point or another.

He is doing, unequivocally, the right thing.

That’s not something Labour people say very often about Tory politicians, never mind Tory Prime Ministers. But in this case it is unquestionably deserved.

Well done Prime Minister. On this issue, history will judge you favourably, and rightly so.

  • https://mikestallard.virtualgallery.com/ Mike Stallard

    Right on!
    Wow!
    Truth! Onwards and upwards, not backwards and sideways.
    That is the Labour Way!

  • http://twitter.com/Ceilidhann Kayleigh Anne

    Indeed he is on the right side of history here. I’m just disappointed that before he got there he’d already gathered this voting record:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_David_Cameron#Gay_rights

    I’d also like to say that I don’t think it “heroic” or “brave” when a Tory decides to stop being a homophobe. It’s not brave to be a decent human being. It’s just doing the right thing.

  • LembitOpiksLovechild

    “No-one should (or could) be forced to conduct a marriage they are against”

    A typically mendacious statement to try and push aside people’s sincerely held obections. Why not, your party and readers of this site are very keen to ensure the law punishes people who do not provide equality of service to gay people in other spheres of life. So should the same apply to bed and breakfast providers, adoption agencies or other providers of services who object on ethical or moral grounds? Thought not.

    Either you permit objections to providing service on moral and ethical grounds or not at all. You can’t have a half way house. After all, marrriage in curch is the same as any other service provided. If this does go ahead how long until a church or vicar is challenged in the courts for refusing to provide gay marriage. How long before Stonewall starts actively searching for a vicar who refuses and then squeals about discrimination.?

  • AlanGiles

    There are times when you can almost feel sorry for Caameron. Here he is trying to push his party into the 21st century and here is one of his right wing MPs Bob Blackman looking wistfully back to the 1980s:

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/antihomosexual-section-28-was-right-for-schools-says-tory-mp-8398942.html

  • PaulHalsall

    I am gay and want equal marriage.

    But damn these Tories who simply attack the poor. What we have is an effort at “pinkwashing” the Tory Party (just as Israel really is a great place for gays, but that does not justify its efforts to suppress Palestine.)

  • PaulHalsall

    Almost no gay person I know thinks that religious people should be required to do, within their religion, what they do not want to do.

    We want civil marriage equality, and the right for any church or synagogue to celebrate such marriages if they want. Liberal Jews, Reform Jews, Quakers, Unitarians, the Metropolitan Community Church all want to. The United Reform Church will probably agree to on a congregation by congregation basis (that s how they are organised).

    I think Anglican vicars who want to, should be able to also, but that is up to the Church of England.

    We do not want to be fascists about this.

    As it is CoE churches do NOT have to marry divorcees (a bit odd considering its history), and Catholic Churches do not have to marry, for example, Jews and Muslims (although CoE churches in Cyprus do provide this service to Israelis!).

    As Karl Popper once noted, often good enough is indeed good enough.

Latest

  • Comment ‘I would have been angry too’

    ‘I would have been angry too’

    Labour needs to learn to let go, says Jim McMahon in exclusive interview with Liz Kendall and Steve Reed for their new pamphlet with Progress ‘If we had gone into marriage guidance counselling at that point,’ says Jim McMahon of the relationship between Oldham council and its residents two years ago, ‘the counsellor might have said: “Do you know what, it might just be time to part ways”.’ Oldham was not, says the man who has led it since May […]

    Read more →
  • News Majority of LabourList readers agree with statement from left-wing MPs

    Majority of LabourList readers agree with statement from left-wing MPs

    At the start of this week, 15 MPs issued a statement calling for an alternative to Labour’s current deficit reduction plans, a policy that would see the railways returned to public ownership and a more robust collective bargaining powers for workers, including better employment rights in the workplace. These proposals are not Labour policy and it’s unlikely that they will be before the election (or at least the first two won’t make it into the manifesto). But what do LabourList […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Labour’s NHS plans should reflect real life not vague values

    Labour’s NHS plans should reflect real life not vague values

    ‘The frequency of talk about values is matched by a corresponding vagueness of the concept’ a famous German philosopher once wrote. In the run-up to the election, Labour is in danger of speaking with a tone of vague passion when talking about the NHS. We insist we’re the only party that can save this cherished institution, but sound unclear and woolly when interviewers ask what that means in practice. The polls aren’t necessarily on our side. Yes, the public think […]

    Read more →
  • Featured “It’s not a simple thing to fix Britain” – Angela Eagle on Labour’s manifesto

    “It’s not a simple thing to fix Britain” – Angela Eagle on Labour’s manifesto

    Angela Eagle has just been to hospital. Two hospitals to be precise. But fear not LabourList readers, there isn’t anything wrong with the Shadow Leader of the House. Quite the opposite, as Eagle – often stereotyped as dry and reserved, is fizzing with energy. The hospital visits (to London’s St Thomas’s and Guys) were part of a series of “workplace week” visits that she’s been doing as part of the launch of Unions Together’s Manifesto for Change. Manifesto for Change […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News Unite donate £1.5 million to Labour’s election campaign – and may donate more

    Unite donate £1.5 million to Labour’s election campaign – and may donate more

    Unite, Labour’s biggest affiliate, have announced that they’re donating £1.5 million to the party’s campaign – and will consider donating further. The news was was made public in a statement from the union’s Executive Council. The union expressed concern that the Tories could be elected on a ‘tide of big business cash, while Labour remains under resourced.’ In July, we reported that the Tories campaign fund was three times bigger than Labour’s and over the summer it emerged the Conservatives had raised millions from private […]

    Read more →