This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/may/21/gay-marriage-bill-divides-conservatives

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Gay marriage debate highlights deep divide in Conservative party Gay marriage debate highlights deep divide in Conservative party
(4 months later)
Deep divisions in the Conservative party were highlighted late on Monday when Tory MPs clashed during a lengthy debate on the gay marriage bill which survived a series of challenges from traditionalists.Deep divisions in the Conservative party were highlighted late on Monday when Tory MPs clashed during a lengthy debate on the gay marriage bill which survived a series of challenges from traditionalists.
Tory reformers expressed exasperation when a former defence minister warned of an "aggressive homosexual community".Tory reformers expressed exasperation when a former defence minister warned of an "aggressive homosexual community".
Sir Gerald Howarth, knighted on the advice of the prime minister after losing his ministerial post, made the remarks when Margot James, who was recently appointed to the Conservative policy board, said that the equal marriage legislation would level the playing field after gay people suffered discrimination in the 1980s. James, who is lesbian, said: "I do recall in the 1980s, and even the 1990s, a freezing effect, I would call it, on the lives of gay people and other minorities because at that time the majority were at liberty to discriminate against us in employment and in every other walk of life practically."Sir Gerald Howarth, knighted on the advice of the prime minister after losing his ministerial post, made the remarks when Margot James, who was recently appointed to the Conservative policy board, said that the equal marriage legislation would level the playing field after gay people suffered discrimination in the 1980s. James, who is lesbian, said: "I do recall in the 1980s, and even the 1990s, a freezing effect, I would call it, on the lives of gay people and other minorities because at that time the majority were at liberty to discriminate against us in employment and in every other walk of life practically."
Howarth replied: "I warn you, and MPs on all sides of the house, that I fear that the playing field has not been levelled. I believe that the pendulum is now swinging so far the other way and there are plenty in the aggressive homosexual community who see this as but a stepping stone to something even further."Howarth replied: "I warn you, and MPs on all sides of the house, that I fear that the playing field has not been levelled. I believe that the pendulum is now swinging so far the other way and there are plenty in the aggressive homosexual community who see this as but a stepping stone to something even further."
The clash between the two Tories came as traditionalists failed in a series of bids to limit the scope of the bill. An amendment to allow registrars to opt out of conducting same sex marriage ceremonies was defeated by 340 to 150, a majority of 190. An amendment to protect the religious beliefs of a person who believes marriage can only take place between a man and women was defeated by 349 to 148, a majority of 201.The clash between the two Tories came as traditionalists failed in a series of bids to limit the scope of the bill. An amendment to allow registrars to opt out of conducting same sex marriage ceremonies was defeated by 340 to 150, a majority of 190. An amendment to protect the religious beliefs of a person who believes marriage can only take place between a man and women was defeated by 349 to 148, a majority of 201.
An amendment to extend civil partnerships to heterosexual couples, which had prompted government warnings that the bill could be derailed, was also defeated after the Labour party swung behind the government. The amendment, tabled by the anti-gay marriage Tory, former children's minister Tim Loughton, was defeated by 375 to 70 votes, a majority of 305.An amendment to extend civil partnerships to heterosexual couples, which had prompted government warnings that the bill could be derailed, was also defeated after the Labour party swung behind the government. The amendment, tabled by the anti-gay marriage Tory, former children's minister Tim Loughton, was defeated by 375 to 70 votes, a majority of 305.
The gulf was so great during the debate that the issue of same sex marriage was a fight as "noble" as the abolition of the slave trade, or but another "stepping stone" for the "aggressive homosexual community". Passions ran high in the chamber even before the supposed "wrecking amendment" on the extension of civil partnerships reached the Commons. The debate opened on the raft of amendments designed to ensure that the bill did not discriminate against teachers, registrars and others opposed to gay marriage on grounds of principle.The gulf was so great during the debate that the issue of same sex marriage was a fight as "noble" as the abolition of the slave trade, or but another "stepping stone" for the "aggressive homosexual community". Passions ran high in the chamber even before the supposed "wrecking amendment" on the extension of civil partnerships reached the Commons. The debate opened on the raft of amendments designed to ensure that the bill did not discriminate against teachers, registrars and others opposed to gay marriage on grounds of principle.
David Burrowes, a Conservative MP who proposed a series of amendments, argued: "This is not a marriage bill, it's an unfair dismissal bill" (for registrars and others with conscientious and religious objections).David Burrowes, a Conservative MP who proposed a series of amendments, argued: "This is not a marriage bill, it's an unfair dismissal bill" (for registrars and others with conscientious and religious objections).
The nation was, he exclaimed, "as divided" as the Conservative parliamentary party on the issue. And legislation was taking the country "into a whole new terrain of legal challenge". No registrars should be compelled to act against their beliefs or be sacked for adhering to the views held by a majority of Tory MPs and "millions of others in this country".The nation was, he exclaimed, "as divided" as the Conservative parliamentary party on the issue. And legislation was taking the country "into a whole new terrain of legal challenge". No registrars should be compelled to act against their beliefs or be sacked for adhering to the views held by a majority of Tory MPs and "millions of others in this country".
Where Burrowes saw potential conflict, the Labour MP Stephen Doughty, (Lab, Cardiff South and Penarth) saw harmony, literally.He said the Commons should "look at the celebrations and happiness in New Zealand", when they signed their own same-sex marriage bill, which manifested itself in "the singing of love songs". He hoped for that here, too, "though perhaps not the singing", he conceded.Where Burrowes saw potential conflict, the Labour MP Stephen Doughty, (Lab, Cardiff South and Penarth) saw harmony, literally.He said the Commons should "look at the celebrations and happiness in New Zealand", when they signed their own same-sex marriage bill, which manifested itself in "the singing of love songs". He hoped for that here, too, "though perhaps not the singing", he conceded.
The veteran Conservative Edward Leigh called for people who disagreed with gay marriage to be given protection under the Equality Act 2010. This was not, he assured the House, because he was "swivel-eyed", though he conceded he became a bit cross-eyed late at night when tired. Nor was he "myopic".The veteran Conservative Edward Leigh called for people who disagreed with gay marriage to be given protection under the Equality Act 2010. This was not, he assured the House, because he was "swivel-eyed", though he conceded he became a bit cross-eyed late at night when tired. Nor was he "myopic".
Neither was it to defend those who were being "beastly" or "horrid" to gay people in the workplace. "But I do think actually that same-sex marriage is different. It seems to many of us, if you dare to disagree with the new orthodoxy that gay marriage is the best thing since sliced bread, you are somehow breaking a new social taboo, you are doing something in your workplace, particularly in the public sector, that you should not be doing."Neither was it to defend those who were being "beastly" or "horrid" to gay people in the workplace. "But I do think actually that same-sex marriage is different. It seems to many of us, if you dare to disagree with the new orthodoxy that gay marriage is the best thing since sliced bread, you are somehow breaking a new social taboo, you are doing something in your workplace, particularly in the public sector, that you should not be doing."
When there was a clash between gay rights and religious freedom, in law gay rights came first, Leigh said. Citing an example of a housing association worker who was demoted for writing on Facebook that gay marriage was "an equality too far", he said the government was legislating in a culture that had been "so coloured by political correctness" that "mild-mannered people expressing reasonable beliefs in moderate tones are treated like villains".When there was a clash between gay rights and religious freedom, in law gay rights came first, Leigh said. Citing an example of a housing association worker who was demoted for writing on Facebook that gay marriage was "an equality too far", he said the government was legislating in a culture that had been "so coloured by political correctness" that "mild-mannered people expressing reasonable beliefs in moderate tones are treated like villains".
The "outlandish views of the loony left of the 1980s" had become "embedded in high places".The "outlandish views of the loony left of the 1980s" had become "embedded in high places".
But the former Labour minister David Lammy said there should be an obligation on public servants to teach about gay marriage, as it would the law once the legislation had passed. He spoke of the "Windrush generation", who arrived in Britain to signs reading "No Irish, no blacks, no dogs". "That was illegal", he said, and the Commons had declared it to be wrong.But the former Labour minister David Lammy said there should be an obligation on public servants to teach about gay marriage, as it would the law once the legislation had passed. He spoke of the "Windrush generation", who arrived in Britain to signs reading "No Irish, no blacks, no dogs". "That was illegal", he said, and the Commons had declared it to be wrong.
Referring to the abolition of the slave trade in the 19th century, he said: "There was a split in this house for 20 years on whether black human beings were human or chattel." "That is why this is a noble fight, "he said.Referring to the abolition of the slave trade in the 19th century, he said: "There was a split in this house for 20 years on whether black human beings were human or chattel." "That is why this is a noble fight, "he said.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.