Babylon
JF-Expert Member
- Feb 5, 2009
- 1,332
- 82
Gay marriage a step closer to becoming legal after House of Lords rejects bid to block bill
Gay marriage plans cleared another major parliamentary hurdle tonight when peers overwhelmingly rejected a bid to block the legislation.
A rare 'wrecking' amendment declining to give the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill a second reading was defeated on a free vote by 390 to 148, with a majority of 242.
The marathon debate, with more than 90 speakers over two days, revealed deep divisions over the controversial measure in the Upper House.
Supporters of same sex marriage sing during a vigil outside the Houses of Parliament yesterday
MPs have already backed the Bill, which applies to England and Wales, despite fierce opposition from dozens of Tory backbenchers
It is certain to face further formidable opposition during detailed line-by-line scrutiny in its later stages.
MPs have already backed the Bill, which applies to England and Wales, despite fierce opposition from dozens of Tory backbenchers.
Critics in both Houses warn the move will undermine the traditional concept of marriage, while supporters stress the need for equality.
The result was greeted with cheers from supporters of gay marriage outside Parliament.
The scale of the vote against the wrecking amendment proposed by independent crossbencher Lord Dear will be a major fillip for the Bill's supporters.
Lord Dear insisted the change would 'completely alter the concept of marriage as we know it'.
The Bill was 'ill thought through' and had no democratic legitimacy, he said. It was so 'fatally flawed' as to be incapable of sensible amendment and should be sent back to 'the drawing board', he said.
The Archbishop of Canterbury said in the debate yesterday that introducing gay marriage would 'abolish' the existing institution and replace it with a weaker option.
The scale of the vote against the wrecking amendment proposed by independent crossbencher Lord Dear will be a major fillip for the Bill's supporters
The Most Rev Justin Welby said the controversial plans would be 'neither equal nor effective'.
Tory former lord chancellor Lord Mackay of Clashfern voiced opposition to the legislation, insisting the union of same sex couples amounted to a 'new and different institution' which deserved a 'name of its own'
Lord Mackay told a crowded chamber that the natural procreation of children could never be a possibility for same-sex couples.
'And therefore a union between them, however loving, cannot have this purpose.'
He said: 'I conclude that the union open to same-sex couples in this Bill is not the institution of marriage but a new and different institution which deserves a name of its own.'
As debate on the Bill resumed today former BBC director general and independent crossbencher Lord Birt said the 'brave Bill' would help bring about a better world.
Lord Birt said that during his years in broadcasting he worked with many people who were gay but would not admit it.
Social and cultural attitudes had since changed and the Bill would help hasten the day when homosexuality was accepted as a 'wholly natural state'.
He said: 'This brave Bill brings us one historic step closer to a better world and I wholeheartedly support it.'
But Baroness Stowell of Beeston, for the Government, hailed the legislation as a 'force for good' which would strengthen the institution of marriage.
She said it protected both religious freedom and freedom of speech.
In the closing moments of the long debate, Lady Stowell also held out an olive branch to religious leaders opposed to conducting same sex marriages.
If further changes to the legislation were necessary to make protections for religious organisations clearer, the Government would consider doing so, she said.
Stonewall chief executive Ben Summerskill said: 'We're absolutely delighted.
'We always expected a tough challenge in the House of Lords, and Lord Dear's 'fatal motion' - very rarely used - demonstrates the lengths to which a minority of peers are, sadly, still prepared to go to deny full equality to lesbian, gay and bisexual people.
'In the last 24 hours alone, opponents of equality in the House of Lords have compared loving, committed relationships to incest and polygamy.
'Britain's 3.7 million gay people don't deserve to be second class citizens in their own country. A tough fight lies ahead and we'll continue to work tirelessly every single day to get equal marriage through the Lords.'
Peter Tatchell, who co-ordinates the Equal Love campaign and has championed same-sex marriage since 1992, said: 'This is a victory for love, marriage and equality.
'We are another step closer to our goal of equal marriage. It signals that the House of Lords accepts the principle that we should all be equal before the law.'
- A 'wrecking' amendment declining to give the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill a second reading was defeated on a free vote by 390 to 148
- Critics warn the move will undermine the traditional concept of marriage
- Supporters stress act is necessary for for equality in marriage
Gay marriage plans cleared another major parliamentary hurdle tonight when peers overwhelmingly rejected a bid to block the legislation.
A rare 'wrecking' amendment declining to give the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill a second reading was defeated on a free vote by 390 to 148, with a majority of 242.
The marathon debate, with more than 90 speakers over two days, revealed deep divisions over the controversial measure in the Upper House.
It is certain to face further formidable opposition during detailed line-by-line scrutiny in its later stages.
MPs have already backed the Bill, which applies to England and Wales, despite fierce opposition from dozens of Tory backbenchers.
Critics in both Houses warn the move will undermine the traditional concept of marriage, while supporters stress the need for equality.
The result was greeted with cheers from supporters of gay marriage outside Parliament.
The scale of the vote against the wrecking amendment proposed by independent crossbencher Lord Dear will be a major fillip for the Bill's supporters.
Lord Dear insisted the change would 'completely alter the concept of marriage as we know it'.
The Bill was 'ill thought through' and had no democratic legitimacy, he said. It was so 'fatally flawed' as to be incapable of sensible amendment and should be sent back to 'the drawing board', he said.
The Archbishop of Canterbury said in the debate yesterday that introducing gay marriage would 'abolish' the existing institution and replace it with a weaker option.
The Most Rev Justin Welby said the controversial plans would be 'neither equal nor effective'.
Tory former lord chancellor Lord Mackay of Clashfern voiced opposition to the legislation, insisting the union of same sex couples amounted to a 'new and different institution' which deserved a 'name of its own'
Lord Mackay told a crowded chamber that the natural procreation of children could never be a possibility for same-sex couples.
'And therefore a union between them, however loving, cannot have this purpose.'
He said: 'I conclude that the union open to same-sex couples in this Bill is not the institution of marriage but a new and different institution which deserves a name of its own.'
As debate on the Bill resumed today former BBC director general and independent crossbencher Lord Birt said the 'brave Bill' would help bring about a better world.
Lord Birt said that during his years in broadcasting he worked with many people who were gay but would not admit it.
Social and cultural attitudes had since changed and the Bill would help hasten the day when homosexuality was accepted as a 'wholly natural state'.
He said: 'This brave Bill brings us one historic step closer to a better world and I wholeheartedly support it.'
But Baroness Stowell of Beeston, for the Government, hailed the legislation as a 'force for good' which would strengthen the institution of marriage.
She said it protected both religious freedom and freedom of speech.
In the closing moments of the long debate, Lady Stowell also held out an olive branch to religious leaders opposed to conducting same sex marriages.
If further changes to the legislation were necessary to make protections for religious organisations clearer, the Government would consider doing so, she said.
Stonewall chief executive Ben Summerskill said: 'We're absolutely delighted.
'We always expected a tough challenge in the House of Lords, and Lord Dear's 'fatal motion' - very rarely used - demonstrates the lengths to which a minority of peers are, sadly, still prepared to go to deny full equality to lesbian, gay and bisexual people.
'In the last 24 hours alone, opponents of equality in the House of Lords have compared loving, committed relationships to incest and polygamy.
'Britain's 3.7 million gay people don't deserve to be second class citizens in their own country. A tough fight lies ahead and we'll continue to work tirelessly every single day to get equal marriage through the Lords.'
Peter Tatchell, who co-ordinates the Equal Love campaign and has championed same-sex marriage since 1992, said: 'This is a victory for love, marriage and equality.
'We are another step closer to our goal of equal marriage. It signals that the House of Lords accepts the principle that we should all be equal before the law.'
