And another step closer …

The possibility of same sex marriages in the UK came yet another step closer today as the House of Lords voted overwhelmingly against a motion that was intended to block the same sex marriage bill.

The Telegraph put it like this.

Prior to the vote, some people had been predicting it might be a close call. But n the event, the attempt to block the bill was defeated by 390 votes to 148. Quite a sizeable majority.

As I mentioned here I had received a letter from Care that encouraged me to write to members of the House of Lords asking them to vote against the same sex marriage bill.

On May 25th I emailed Care at mail@care.org.uk as follows:

Dear Care,

I'm writing in response to a letter that you sent regarding the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill dated May 2013.

I'm saddened by the way that you are reacting to this whole issue and have made some comments on this here: http://andrea-wright.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/caring-and-care.html

Please let me know if you feel anything that I've said is unreasonable or unfair and I'll be happy to update it accordingly.

Alternatively, it would be really lovely if you were to change your views on this topic.

So far I’ve had no reply, suggesting either that people at Care are happy that my comments are reasonable and fair or that they are  busy doing other things and don’t care.

Caring and Care

I received the following letter from Care, dated May 2013:

Making a Christian Difference for the sake of the future

By the time you read this the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill will have completed its journey through the House of Commons. It now goes to the Lords.

It was important to set out arguments for MPs and maximise the vote against the Bill, but we realised that it would be very difficult to win in the Commons. However, at the Second Reading in the House of Lords on Monday 3 June there will be a vote and, if all the Peers opposed to the Bill are present, there is a real chance of defeating the Bill at this crucial stage.

I am therefore writing to ask you to act urgently by sending a letter or email to one or more of the Peers specially selected and listed overleaf. Please contact as many as you can as soon as possible, asking them to attend the debate on Monday 3 June, to consider speaking in support of traditional marriage and to vote against the Bill. You could also mention the following:

There are many constitutional irregularities in the Bill's development. There was no mandate for this fundamental policy change. It was not in any party manifesto or the Coalition Agreement. There was no

Green Paper or White Paper. It wasn't in any Queen's Speech.

Religious liberty measures in the Bill are limited to 'wedding ceremony' protections for church ministers and churches. Contrary to what the Government has said, these are far from robust. There are no free speech conscience protections for public sector employees: chaplains, teachers, registrars, and others.

Please ask others to write too and, above all, continue to pray about this issue. More information about the

Bill and its progress is at www.care.org.uk/marriage. If the Bill is passed at the Lords' Second Reading there will still be opportunities at its later stages and we will keep you informed.

Thank you so much for your ongoing support in this crucial matter. If the Government passes this Bill there will be far reaching consequences for society that will affect us and future generations.

Yours in His grace

Nola Leach

Head of Public Affairs

Nola Leach

Care

53 Romney Street

London

SW1p 3RF

mail@care.org.uk

Care is a registered charity: Charity No. 1066963

The reverse of the letter includes a list of about 40 Peers from Lord Moran to Lord Saatchi in alphabetical order. There are details of email addresses of a whole load of Peers here. There’s also information on how to contact them here.

I think it’s interesting that the letter makes no mention of the following facts:

• The vote in the House of Commons was a free vote. Each Member of Parliament was free to vote however she or he wished.
• A very large majority of the MPs that voted were in favour of the bill
• The House of Lords is an unelected body made up of these people. It even includes bishops of the Church of England. Peers in the House of Lords aren’t answerable to any electorate. Effectively they are an undemocratic body of people.

My own point of view:

• Whether there was a mandate, party manifesto commitment, coalition agreement, green paper, white paper or Queens Speech on this is irrelevant.
• I don’t see a real reason as to why public sector employees should have special treatment compared with other employees
• I believe that it is not only churches and church ministers that are “protected”. The protection talks about religion rather than churches
• It seems a shame that Care are keen to capitalise on the potential support of an unelected and undemocratic body to further their own socio-political view of how life should be

I think that the people at Care likely have good intentions. But I believe that the main reason for their opposition to this Bill is really that they believe that the Bible says that Gay relationships are sinful. They don’t want to do anything that encourages or makes it easier for people to get involved in sin. I believe that they would say that they do this because sin damages people. And so their opposition to the Bill is actually about doing the best for society and for individuals. Ultimately they believe that in opposing the Bill they are performing the will of God.

Of course, all of that depends on believing in God, believing in the Bible as the Word of God, and also believing in a particular interpretation of the meaning of the Bible.

Maybe you would like to write to Care and let them know how you feel? In a polite way, of course. There is contact information here.

As an aside, I just started to read through the Bill here. Whoever wrote it isn’t going to be getting any prizes from these people.

The possibility of same sex marriage comes a little closer

The House of Commons has voted in favour of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill. This was the third stage.

In common with a lot of people, I don’t know much about how a Bill becomes Law in the UK. If you’re like me then there’s a descri0tion of the process here.

So it looks like it now has to go through a whole series of stages in the House of Lords.

Some of the statistics are unusual.

According to the Daily Mirror 133 Conservative MPs voted against the Bill, whilst only 123 voted in favour.

However, a total of 366 MPs from all parties voted in favour, with only 161 voting against – a majority of 205.

I believe that it’s quite unusual a Bill to be passed when so few of the Governments own party voted in favour of it.

There are now calls from some of the people that voted against the Bill asking that the (unelected and undemocratic) House of Lords prevent it from becoming law. 

My own Member of Parliament, Adam Afriyie has consistently voted against the Bill. There’s a record of communications that I had with him here and here.

Adam wrote:

For the avoidance of doubt, I am very much in favour of a long term commitment between same sex couples and I would like to see the same legislation underpinning every long term relationship so that there is no further inequality in the eyes of the law.

I must admit, that I don’t understand this at all, and I very much doubt the truth if the above statement.

I’m suspicious that some people that have spoken out against the Bill haven’t been completely open about their reasons. The list of reasons include protection of families, of the institution of marriage, of children. The Daily Mirror says:

It comes after Tory grandee Norman Tebbit accused Mr Cameron of “f***** things up” over gay marriage.

The former party chairman claimed the change could spark a constitutional crisis if a lesbian queen married a woman and had a sperm donor child.

The mind boggles.

I don’t know what Norman Tebbit’s real objections are.

However, I think that maybe, for quite a few people, there’s an underlying feeling that the Bible says it’s wrong. And so they think it’s wrong. And so they are against it. There are some people that say this. But I have the feeling that there are others that think this, but don’t say it. Instead they come up with a host of other reasons.

Over the coming few days I hope to make time to write to my MP and ask exactly why he voted against the Bill and what actions he is taking to ensure that there is no further inequality in the eyes of the law.

In which I discover that trying to get an answer from a politician can seem a bit like trying to get blood from a stone

As I mentioned here I was planning on writing to my Member of Parliament (again) on the subject of same-sex marriage.

I wrote:

 

Thank you for replying to my email. I've attached a copy of your reply to this email.

I was disappointed to hear that you voted against the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill and also that you didn't actually answer the question that I asked in my email.

Please could you let me know if you will now support the Bill as it progresses through Parliament providing that "the Church and other religious organisations are not coerced to hold such ceremonies through the threat of litigation, and that those who wish to form same sex civil partnerships are treated equally under the law"?

Alternatively I would appreciate it if you could let me know if it is the case that you are fundamentally opposed to the concept of same sex marriages?

And the reply:

Thank you for your email regarding the changes proposed to marriage by the Government.

I certainly understand your concern over this issue and appreciate you taking the time to share your views.

As I mentioned in our previous correspondence, I will be taking a final view on this legislation once it has been scrutinised and amended in Committee and returns to the House of Commons. Legislation often changes during its course through parliament, and is sometimes withdrawn or significantly amended in the House of Lords.

For the avoidance of doubt, I am very much in favour of a long term commitment between same sex couples and I would like to see the same legislation underpinning every long term relationship so that there is no further inequality in the eyes of the law.

Thank you again for contacting me. You have my commitment that I give the legislation the scrutiny it requires.

Maybe it’s just me … but I can’t help but feel a real reticence to make any commitment at all to supporting the bill – only potential reasons for not doing so. And yet also, a reticence to say anything very strongly against it. Maybe it’s just the way politicians tend to be.

At the end of the day I’m left two thoughts:

• If the bill were to return to the House of Commons unchanged, then my MP would vote against it – having voted against it already
• My MP is either unwilling or unable to say what changes to the bill would result in him voting in favour of it

I’ll see what happens with it next and write back to him when things begin to move again.