Equalities Minister says there is no reason to delay equal marriage

[WindFish]

The new Equalities Minister/Culture Secretary has declared there isn't any reason to delay equal marriage beyond 2015 which dashes hopes of the right and religious groups.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-no-reason-to-delay-gay-marriage-8153389.html

Spoiler :

[/quote]

The Conservative cabinet minister who was handed responsibility for gay marriage legislation in the reshuffle today dashes the hopes of religious groups and the Tory right that the Government is preparing to delay or shelve its proposals.

Writing about her views on the subject for the first time on Independent Voices the Culture Secretary Maria Miller says she believes gay marriage must be legalised to preserve Britain’s “proud history of freedom and fairness” and ensure that the institution remains relevant in the 21st century.

Giving the move her unequivocal backing she insists that safeguards are in place to respect religious freedoms but adds that that state must not stand in the way of opening up civil marriage to all.

Her intervention will be a blow to large numbers of Conservative MPs and peers who vehemently oppose the change and hoped that her appointment in the reshuffle as equalities minister in place of the Liberal Democrat Lynne Featherstone was a signal that the Government was preparing to change its mind and delay the plan.

Before becoming a minister Ms Miller had a mixed voting record in the House of Commons on equalities legislation. She was absent from the vote on the Equality Act of 2007, and in 2008 voted against allowing same-sex couples access to fertility treatment.

Last night, one of the leading Tory critics of the plan accused Ms Miller of “undermining” and “prejudging” the Government’s on-going consultation into the reforms the results of which are due to be published at the end of the year.

“I am surprised that the Government has decided to give any indication about the progress of the consultation and its thinking before it has had a chance to analyse the 228,000 responses it received,” he said.

“There is a huge swath and depth of concern about this and ministers should not be undermining or prejudging their own consultation on a subject of such fundamental importance as redefining marriage.”

But writing today Ms Miller said she fully supports changing the law. Legislation is likely to be introduced into Parliament next year at the time of Queen’s Speech.

“When it comes to the state’s role in marriage, I think a change is needed,” she writes.

“Many people in civil partnerships already refer to their partner as their “husband” or “wife”, but they are not technically “married” and do not have the option to become so. I see no reason to perpetuate this.

“Most people would agree that marriage is a good thing; choosing to spend the rest of your life with someone you love brings commitment and stability. What’s more, it helps bind society together and strengthens our communities.

“I believe that marriage is an institution that benefits Britain and extending it will make sure it stays as important - and relevant - as ever. Love, fidelity, commitment and stability are something to celebrate.

“If someone choses to marry the person they love we should celebrate this, not stand in their way. It can only strengthen the communities in which we live and our country which has a proud history of freedom and fairness.”

Ben Summerskill, chief executive of the gay rights group Stonewall welcomed Ms Miller clear and unambiguous support.

“We are delighted that Maria has been persuaded that no-one should have a monopoly on the use of the word marriage,” he said.

“We quite understand the concerns of some of the faith groups so it is important that she has been able to reassure them that they will not be compelled in any way to allow same sex marriage in religious premises.”

However a spokesman for the Coalition for Marriage said: “We are very disappointed to hear this. This legislation is anti-democratic as it is not what a majority of the public want and we would urge her to reconsider.”[/quote]

This adds to what the new culture secretary said earlier in which she said that being gay wasn't a good enough reason to block a marriage.

I suppose it was inevitable because most people in a civil union refer to it as a marriage anyway and this would legalise what was already the case anyway.

 

[Arwon]

When the UK Tories are less backwards than an atheist Australian Labor PM it's a little bit shameful.

 

[warpus]

Not allowing two people to get married because they're both ugly I could understand. But just because they are gay? Come on.. What are you, some sort of an anti-gayist?

 

[luiz]

Equalities Minister? Ugh.

 

[AlpsStranger]

While I am very happy to see gays given their full rights in yet another land, I must admit that an "Equalities Minister" sounds a little Orwellian for my taste.

Seriously, can some one tell me what an Equalities Minister is before I imagine something crazy?

 

[Arwon]

It just means they deal with discrimination issues and particularly gender issues.

 

[Borachio]

I dunno. I think it's just a new(ish) name for what was the Equal Opportunities Minister (and/or Commission). Or something, I'd have to look it up. But the UK is generally hopelessly naive - so not likely to be all that Orwellian.

edit: true, there's CCTV all over the place, but no-one pays any attention until someone does something. Then they realize they forgot to change the tape (or whatever it is). Still drinking industrial gin, though.

 

[Leoreth]

Equalities Minister? Ugh.

Yeah, who wants equality? What's next, a minister of justice?

 

[WindFish]

Seriously, can some one tell me what an Equalities Minister is before I imagine something crazy?

Its a minister who tackles social inequalities in the Yoo Kay

When the UK Tories are less backwards than an atheist Australian Labor PM it's a little bit shameful.

The UK Tories are spilt between Compassionate Conservatives and Faux-GOPers.

 

[Borachio]

The UK Tories are spilt between Compassion Conservatives and Faux-GOPers.

Or the Wets and the Dries?

 

[AlpsStranger]

Yeah, who wants equality?

It's not that. It just doesn't seem like the kind of thing that would require a unique post.

 

[Yeekim]

While I am very happy to see gays given their full rights in yet another land, I must admit that an "Equalities Minister" sounds a little Orwellian for my taste.

This.

 

[Leoreth]

What's Orwellian about it? The slightly euphemistic title? I don't see a difference to things like the ministry of defense.

 

[luiz]

Yeah, who wants equality? What's next, a minister of justice?

Do you have a Minister of Happiness, a Minister of Prettiness, a Minister of Politeness?

To enforce equality we have something called the Law and the Justice system. There's no need to create a minister for every desirable goal. The law says gays can married? Awesome. It says they can't? Well, it's up to Parliament change the Law.

 

[Borachio]

Look. Laugh all you want. All we in the UK know is, if you want to get rid of something appoint a minister of it, and it disappears. Works with drought every time. Soon as there's a Minister of Drought, the heavens open and never stop till we're fed up with it. OK?

Hang on. That means we should have a Minister of Inequality. Hmmm.

 

[Yeekim]

All we in the UK know is, if you want to get rid of something appoint a minister of it, and it disappears.

So why do you hate equality so much?

 

[Borachio]

Did I say everything was perfect, or logically consistent, here? No. I didn't.

 

[WindFish]

Do you have a Minister of Happiness, a Minister of Prettiness, a Minister of Politeness?

To enforce equality we have something called the Law and the Justice system. There's no need to create a minister for every desirable goal. The law says gays can married? Awesome. It says they can't? Well, it's up to Parliament change the Law.

Huh

The Equalities Minister is the same as the Culture Secretary and the Equalities office is a sub-office of the Home Office.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Would Minister for Women and Anti-bigotry be better?

 

[LucyDuke]

I enjoy how nobody's bothering to talk about what she said.