Friday, 30 July 2010

Ed Miliband Supports Marriage Equality

The final piece of the puzzle falls into place. Ed Miliband has, in a Twitter message to me, confirmed his support for marriage equality.

"@JaeKay Got asked abt this today &made clear I support principle of gay marriage. Need to consult on how to implement."

That is now all five Labour leader candidates on board the marriage equality bus.

UPDATE: Here's earwicga's actual question and answer earlier.
If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist


magicman92 said...

Well done! Great achievement!

earwicga said...

I was the person who asked Ed about marriage equality earlier and he wasn't that clear.

igaylord said...

To be fair, Jaekay, civil partnerships ARE a wee bit more that a 'stepping stone' towards 'equality.'

At a very recent BBC 'Question Time' recording in the Highlands time ran out before I could put my own question to the panel - though I had been selected as one of the questioners. I wanted to ask whether they agreed marriage equality has become inevitable, and if so when the law would be changed to allow gay people to marry.

My late partner and I had a civil partnership. It was something which, after many years together, gave us enormous pleasure and pride. Of course we would rather have been married. But please don't belittle what we had.

Of course I support the cause of marriage equality. As a gay man you must know as I know there is no end to it. We have to keep coming out, daily, again and again, challenging people to behave decently.

It gave me a real kick to be able to say - when asked whether I was 'married' - that I had a Civil Partnership.

You should try it: and I know you'll be able to get
properly married later.

Jae said...

I try not to mix individuals choices about taking a civil partnership and the wider question of their equality. Any suggestion that I belittle individuals arrangements are your reading of what I write, not what I mean. I belittle the concept, not the personal choices.

As civil partnerships are different from marriage, I do not see them as a stepping stone AT ALL. The Government's stance in the current consultation of simply amending them shows the damaging effect they've had on the debate.

I am not going to get a civil partnership as I personally would not feel comfortable in an institution that is discriminatory against transgendered people and heterosexuals (just as some heterosexuals won't marry until it's equal). My personal choice. I'm not going to tell people they need to get married, so don't tell me I should get a civil partnership. The concept is just as insulting to me, as someone saying you shouldn't have got one.

I'm not aiming for civil partnerships to be done away with. I'd just want them to be opened up to mixed sex couples too.

igaylord said...

There's a process going on, and its surely a question of tactics. In the long run I don't see how "marriages' and 'civil partnerships' can - or should - co-exist. As some one with a legal background I must tell you there is effectively no difference between the contracts.

But yes it IS an emotive issue. It IS a matter of 'pride.' I said in an earlier comment, aluta continua, the battle continues.

Jae said...

The introduction of civil partnerships were welcomed by many who do not wish to get married. I think it would immoral for the Government and the supporters of civil partnerships to say to them "We introduced those only as a stop gap measure (have you never heard of tactics?), we're upgrading you all to marriage. No you don't get a choice".

So no, I think like the Netherlands we should maintain both systems and make them gender neutral.

Whilst both contracts might be similar from a purely legal viewpoint that ignores the morality of creating another system that is gender specific, effecting transgender people. I work on the "nobody left behind" premise and am opposed to throwing our transgender population's rights under the bus. There are other issues, such as international recognition, that are complicated by our separate but equal rulings.

I don't play "politics" as such. I have principles, and I stand by them. I shan't sell out people I care for just for a small step for my rights.