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 Labour could lose out by not making it’s stance on Trident clear

    Labour could lose out by not making it’s stance on Trident clear

    Cutting Trident will be the price of support in a hung parliament. That’s the news reported from a meeting of the SNP, Plaid Cymru and Green leaders this week. With Labour’s slim lead and the SNP and Green vote threatening to impact on its share, this is a serious issue. Labour’s policy clearly states, ‘Labour has said that we are committed to a minimum, credible independent nuclear deterrent, delivered through a Continuous At-Sea Deterrent. It would require a clear body […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured Is Cameron “frit” of TV debates? Let’s try the empty chair threat

    Is Cameron “frit” of TV debates? Let’s try the empty chair threat

    Lord Ashcroft has told him he shouldn’t have done it in 2010. Lynton Crosby has told him not to do it in 2015. It’s no surprise that David Cameron is trying to wriggle out of televised leader debates during the General Election – even though he has said he is willing to take part “in principle”. Time perhaps to dust off one of Margaret Thatcher’s favourite barbs “He’s frit.” Neil Kinnock tried it in 1992 to try to goad John Major into […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Flexibility makes for good work, strong families and thriving communities

    Flexibility makes for good work, strong families and thriving communities

    By Stephen Timms MP and Ian Murray MP The Christmas period reminds us that modern life can be busy, hurried and demanding. The pressures of work, demands of family life and hectic Christmas schedules can prove stretching as we juggle competing demands. Increasingly the need for flexible work is driven by the complex shape of people’s lives; as parents go to work, struggle to make ends meet, perform career roles, take their children to school and activities and try and carve […]

    Read more →
  • News Labour MP questions campaigning roles of publicly funded advisers

    Labour MP questions campaigning roles of publicly funded advisers

    As the start of the long campaign begins today, curbing the amount of money parties can spend between now and May 7th, Labour MP Jon Ashworth has sought to clarify what precautions are being taken to ensure publicly-funded government advisers are not using their time campaigning. Ashworth has sent a letter to senior civil servant Jeremy Heywood, asking him to answer a number of questions about what kind of campaigning activity was permitted and undertaken by special advisers (SpAds) in […]

    Read more →
  • News Berger asks Twitter to do more to stop use of racist words

    Berger asks Twitter to do more to stop use of racist words

    Luciana Berger, Shadow Minister for Public Health, has called on Twitter to do more the stop racist terms being used on the site. Berger has herself faced a large amount of anti-semitic abuse on the site, and in October Garron Helm  was jailed for sending her a torrent of anti-semitic messages. Berger told the Telegraph (£): “At the height of the abuse, the police said I was the subject of 2,500 hate messages in the space of three days using […]

    Read more →