*Glittery tumbleweed floats past*
Sod that! It was a wedding and I am now married! It was a beautiful day and all the hard work really paid off. Everything about it just fills me with happy when I think about it. However, to prevent myself from gushing and experiencing a bout of happy tears I must move on. I only mention it, because it ties into my thoughts for a blog quite nicely.
Over the summer there has been a massive amount of coverage on the issue of equal marriage. What is even more impressive is that this discussion is not just restricted to the UK, it has become a pressing global matter with dozens of prominent political powers considering their stance. Sadly, the UK does seem to be a little behind and are certainly not leading the way on this front, but they are making progress.
On a frequent basis, we are being reminded that David Cameron is determined to press ahead and ensure that the UK reforms legislation would enable the LGBT community to ‘marry’ instead of to ‘civil partner’ (there is simply no way of saying it without it sounding like a horrid legal term for a start!). It could be considered impressive that Mr Cameron is showing such a strong opinion on the matter and he is certainly not caving into the stereotypical and archaic opinions of the conservative backbenchers. Well, he has given them a ‘free vote’ but for all intents and purposes he is determined to see this go ahead.
“Yipee” is the shout from the gays, lesbians, transsexuals and bisexuals, “and now we love David Cameron and shall vote Conservative forevermore”… or at least that is the way he would like it to play out. Pardon me for being rather cynical but whilst I welcome the right to get married and see another example of equality succeed, I do have some reservations about Cameron’s motive.
Take a look over the history of the Conservative party; historically they have been an enemy of equality and certainly an enemy to the LGBT community. I have alluded to my total disdain with their politics in the past but lest we forget the policy that the Conservative government introduced in 1988; a policy that sought to prevent a local authority from intentionally promoting homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality. It also prevented schools from teaching the acceptability of homosexuality as what they called a ‘pretended’ family relationship.
I should really avoid getting into the number of ways in which this was disgustingly unfair, but I just can’t help getting wound up by it. It makes it sound like being homosexual is something that you are recruited into or that the LGBT community were intensively patrolling the streets, knocking on front doors and asking “have you found the way of the Gay?” Oh wait, now doesn’t that sound rather familiar… The last time I checked it was perfectly acceptable to actively promote religion as a way of life.
Now I will try not to go off the deep end here, but you have to ask, did gay people even WANT to ‘promote’ homosexuality in a way that was ‘recruiting’ people to the orientation? I don't think so somehow. They make it sound like there was a choice in the matter and that gay people could force others into some kind cult! Of course, we know that is complete and utter nonsense, what they did want was to promote the notion that it is acceptable to be gay. If there was any ‘promotion’ it was one of equality! (See, I’m using lots of exclamation marks now, can you see what it does to me!) I will indeed avoid the apparently pretended family relationship comment. Seriously, what the hell is that supposed to mean? Pretended????
Section 28 was a policy that was murky at best. It was never entirely clear as to what was considered ‘promotion’ and what wasn’t. At the time the National Union of Teachers made a statement to clarify their position: "While Section 28 applies to local authorities and not to schools, many teachers believe, albeit wrongly, that it imposes constraints in respect of the advice and counselling they give to pupils. Professional judgement is therefore influenced by the perceived prospect of prosecution.”
Ultimately, it meant that schools and local authorities wouldn’t even listen to anything regarding homophobic bullying or even a pupil looking for advice when going through the minefield of emotion, fear and uncertainty that coming out can sometimes be. Teachers were terrified of touching the homosexual issue with anything that even remotely resembled a barge pole for fear of breaking the law.
For those readers who were unaware of it before now, can you see the amount of damage that this legislation would cause? Thankfully, the legislation was repealed in 2003 but it really isn’t that simple. For 15 years it was perfectly legal and acceptable for teachers to ignore homophobic bullying and allow it to continue. After all, the law was woolly enough to make a teacher question if they would be considered to be ‘promoting’ homosexuality if they stepped in to stop the bullying. There is a whole generation of children that were left vulnerable because of section 28 and I was one of them. Call me petty, but I don’t think the Conservative Party should ever be allowed to forget this. I am not saying that they should be made to pay for it for all time, but it is one of those history lessons that should never be forgotten nonetheless. There are more people out there that are totally unaware of the history of the LGBT and that is a little worrying; this is just one of the many events that people should be aware of.
So, yes, I am a little cynical when it comes to the Conservatives and the apparent U-turn on accepting the LGBT community and striving for Equality. Cameron is certainly saying all the right words but when it comes down to it, he is getting an almighty amount of grief from his party and backbenchers about it too. There was a ComRes poll at the weekend, of 100 Conservative Party constituency chairmen and it showed 71% think the policy should be abandoned whilst 47% believe David Cameron’s support for the move has cost them, members.
So why would Cameron risk losing supporters by pushing ahead with marriage equality I wonder? One has to assume that he is likely to gain far more public support if he is seen to be in favour of marriage equality and therefore he is willing to face the displeasure of his own party in order to win a few more votes. By making the Conservatives the party that introduced equal marriage Cameron is trying to carve out a new legacy, one that he hopes will overshadow Section 28. One that will win the LGBT community vote.
Funny enough, I am not the only one that thinks it. Lord Ashcroft who is considered one of the Conservative Party’s most influential and respected supporters, said on the Conservative Home website that dropping equal marriage could undermine the party’s chances of winning an outright parliamentary majority at the next general election.
Is it Cameron’s own personal view, an attempt to expand the appeal of the party (something the Conservatives have done many times before) or is it a placatory move for the benefit of their coalition partners?
Cameron recognises that if he backs out of the equal marriage policy now, not only would they risk losing the LGBT vote or at least fail to entice us, but they could also lose substantially more voters who want to see their friends and family get the same equal rights. So the question here, is this Cameron led equal marriage policy a bid to improve the image of the Conservative brand or is it, much like the coalition itself, another marriage of convenience?
Thanks for stopping by x
0 comments:
Post a Comment