According to the Guardian the majority of people in the UK now support the legalization of gay marriage. A term I find odd as it’s not really illegal for gay people to marry it’s just not recognized, which may be splitting hairs but I think points to the way in which the survey was probably phrased. I am it seems learning to be ever less trustful of polls and how they can be slanted.
That aside though this lead to people I know uttering statements of anger towards the Rev Vincent Nichols, for having the audacity to suggest that the way that Gay marriage is being introduced is shambolic. From what little I’ve read he has a damn good point, this is primary legislation which has really quite far reaching effects which wasn’t in any party manifesto, wasn’t in the Queens speech and has just suddenly become this urgent thing which Mr Cameron feels the need to rush through. I know we’re an impatient country these days and Mr Cameron probably needs the ratings boast, but surely if this is so very important it’s equally important that it be got right and thus the legislation and the ramifications of the legislation should be discussed and thought through properly? That doesn’t play well to the do it now, create new legislation and then legislate again to fix the screw ups of the first lot of legislation and keep going till you’ve cut all the legs off the table culture we seem to have in Westminster – but surely it would be a better idea than rushing it through in a shambolic fashion? Over on Lynne Featherstones blog she claims it’s the “governments intention” to let churches make up their own mind, but well they’ve already said they won’t let the CofE make up it’s own mind, and lets be honest the track record of our Governments for letting people make their own decision really isn’t that good. I also like her argument that a manifesto is “a prospectus of what a government will do – not a prospectus of all it will do”, as the previous lot went to court to argue that wasn’t the case and I think we’ve all seen enough broken manifesto promises to know that’s a load of bunk. Perhaps if they got round to doing everything they got elected to do then when they’ve got some spare time they can start tackling the extra stuff? If this is so popular then put it in the next manifesto, who ever doesn’t have it will get trounced and things can be done nicely and everyone will be happy?
The think I find at this instance the most fascinating if how politicians and those that like to shout at other people will throw opinions polls around like they’re carved on stone tablets by the finger of God when it’s for something they support, but if it’s something they don’t like well you wouldn’t want to give into “mob rule”. Let’s consider a few other opinion polls which by the current logic our politicians and those waving opinion polls for gay marriage should be getting behind:
death penalty supported by more people than against since 1936 (except for 1966)
stronger immigration control – supported by 73% of people
Most people don’t support electoral reform so let’s stop banging on about that
Seems that most of us think unemployment benefits are too high so the government should be being encouraged to take the axe to those as well.
It is of course all bollocks opinion polls are fickle things, and public opinion changes. Which is all the more reason not to hurry things but to get any legislation right, if there’s even need for it, and to make sure that the case for it is made on the grounds of principle not “it’s the popular thing to do”. If we’re to be governed by opinion poll then lets get rid of the 650 and just have government by opinion poll, The ICM poll the Gordian references just asked 1002 people so as long as lets say 500 people more support a thing than oppose we let it pass? Or we could avoid shambolic rushed legislation and expect our paid politicians to take time to consider and consult before making a choice based on principle? If they do go for recognizing gay marriage then I do have to wonder what they’re thought of for divorce law and all the other annoying bits of legislation which mention marriage I can’t help but suspect there may be some interesting gotcha’s lurking out there in the quagmire of our bloated legal system.
For the record I don’t favour legal gay marriage, I think in this day and age the state shouldn’t be having anything to do with “marriage”, let everyone register their partnerships with the state if they so choose and have whatever spiritual/religious/secular marriage ceremony that they won’t as the state won’t give two figs either way. It is worth noting after all that heterosexual couples don’t have the choice of a civil partnership which must be quite annoying for the more secular of them? Surely better the state gets out of the “marriage” business and just registers the partnership between any set of people that wish to be registered as partners by contract be it for business, love, convenience or whatever, then let the terms of the contract determine what happens when it gets dissolved.
I have nothing against being gay, my wife and i, often feel gay and this christmas we certainly have been having a gay old time. If people want to be gay, happy and gay, i say good for them. As for homosexuals, i suppose they have the same right to be gay if they feel in the mood for it,; but they shouldnt insist that its necessary to be wed to feel gay; i know as often felt gay before i was wed. Lets all be gay for christmas.
Very well said, though I would say that a sombre marriage wouldn’t be a patch on a gay one, and a gay wedding is surely de rigueur.