UK lawmakers approve same-sex marriage in first vote

[Ostrinski]

London (CNN) -- UK lawmakers approved Tuesday the second reading of a bill legalizing same-sex marriage, an issue that has prompted widespread rebellion within Prime Minister David Cameron's Conservative Party.
The 400-175 vote indicated a significant majority of members support the measure. However, the legislation has to clear more parliamentary hurdles to become law.
It faces another vote in the House of Commons and a vote in the House of Lords.
Before Tuesday's vote, three top party members appealed to Conservative MPs to get behind the controversial legislation in a letter published in the Telegraph newspaper.
The letter, signed by Chancellor George Osborne, Foreign Secretary William Hague and Home Secretary Theresa May, said that passing the bill is "the right thing to do at the right time."
The institution of marriage has evolved over time, the letter said, while "attitudes towards gay people have changed."
Brendon Ayanbadejo talks NFL gay rights
Boy Scouts consider ending gay ban
Manti Te'o: I'm not gay
Obama promotes gay rights in speech
Poet makes history at Obama inauguration
In a direct appeal to fellow party members, the trio added: "We believe that opening it up to same-sex couples will strengthen, not weaken, the institution. As David Cameron has said, we should support gay marriage not in spite of being Conservatives, but because we are Conservatives."
Same-sex marriage around the world
The legislation passed the House of Commons with the support of lawmakers from Labour and the Liberal Democrats. The latter are in a coalition government with the Conservatives.
As drafted, the bill would enable religious organizations to choose to conduct same-sex marriages if they wish and includes provisions intended to make sure no religious organization or person is forced to do so.
The Church of England is among the religious bodies opposed to the legislation.
The bill would also allow same-sex couples to convert a civil partnership to a marriage and enable married transsexual people to gain legal recognition in their acquired gender without having to end their marriages.
A law recognizing civil partnerships in England and Wales was passed in 2004.
Tony and Barrie Drewitt-Barlow, who are already same-sex civil partners and have five children together, told CNN that it was important to them to be able to marry in front of their fellow churchgoers.
"We want to be able to go into our local parish church, where we are practicing Christians, and under the eyes of the Lord, get married," said Barrie Drewitt-Barlow.
"I don't want to go in front of a vicar or priest who doesn't want to do it; it's supposed to be the happiest day of my life. I want to be really happy and joyous when I get married to the man that I've been together with for 25 years."
His partner, Tony, said it was a question of equality.
"Marriage is all about the union of two people that love each other and want to bind that love in a relationship that lasts forever. And for me, it's about having that right for everybody, gay, straight or bisexual," he said.
"Whatever you are, if you love that person, then you should have the rights to be joined in matrimony with them."
Cameron has said he is determined to push through legislation allowing same-sex marriage "not only as someone who believes in equality but as someone who believes passionately in marriage."
Priests in same-sex relationships may become Anglican Bishops
But his commitment to that aim has set him at odds with many in his own party.
A number of local party members wrote to the prime minister Sunday, urging him to reconsider.
"We feel very strongly that the decision to bring this Bill before Parliament has been made without adequate debate or consultation with either the membership of the Conservative Party or with the country at large," said the letter, published on the Conservative Grassroots website.
"Long-held religious and personal freedoms and the right to free speech will be adversely affected by the passing of this Bill."
The Church of England also outlined its objections to the bill in a briefing note sent to lawmakers Friday.
It cannot support the legislation "because of its concern for the uncertain and unforeseen consequences for wider society and the common good when marriage is redefined in gender-neutral terms," it said.
It also argues that civil partnerships "already confer the same rights as marriage" and that allowing same-sex couples to marry will open the door to "continued legal disputes for years to come."
The issue of same-sex marriage has also prompted wide disagreement elsewhere.
Lawmakers in France's lower house of parliament, the National Assembly, on Saturday passed with a wide majority the most important article of a law to legalize same-sex marriage.
Debate will continue for the next week on thousands of proposed amendments to the law, which would also open adoption to same-sex couples.
The vote by French lawmakers followed big public protests against the bill, which has proved highly divisive in the majority Catholic country.
In the United States, where President Barack Obama has voiced his personal support for same-sex marriage, it has been legalized in nine states and the District of Columbia.
At the same time, 30 states have passed constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage, according to the Pew Research Center.
Polls show the U.S. public has gradually become more accepting of same-sex marriage, with more Americans in favor in 2013 than opposed, according to Pew.
Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Spain, South Africa and Norway are among nearly a dozen countries that allow same-sex marriages.
According to a report released in May 2011 by the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association, same-sex relations are still criminalized in 76 countries, and in five of those countries, the death penalty can be applied.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/05/world/...html?hpt=hp_t2

[DancingEmma]

Interesting article to read. It's really fascinating to me how the push for same-sex marriage has become increasingly mainstream over the years, to the point where conservatives can argue it's a move to "strengthen, not weaken, the institution." 20 years ago, even 10 years ago, this sort of rhetoric would have been unimaginable, I think. I hope these conservatives are wrong, of course. I personally want to see the institution of marriage abolished. I'm hopeful that same sex marriage, seeing as it further erodes the traditional basis of patriarchal marriage, will be a step toward this eventual abolition.

In any case, I'm happy for the same sex British and French couples who soon will get to be treated a little more equally in relation to their straight counterparts. That said, a whole, whole lot more besides just marriage rights needs to be achieved if LGBTQ people are going to be viewed by society as truly equal to straight people.

[Le Socialiste]

Oops, didn't realize you already posted news of this.

[Ostrinski]

That said, a whole, whole lot more besides just marriage rights needs to be achieved if LGBTQ people are going to be viewed by society as truly equal to straight people.

Indeed. While this doesn't really scratch the surface of the issues surrounding LGBT oppression, I think it still constitutes a symbolic victory. It might make LGBT groups and individuals feel less isolated and so this might serve as a morale boost for them to keep up or even intensify the struggle against unjust social relations of sexuality.

It could possibly serve as a wedge against the anti-LGBT bigots who may feel like they suffered a defeat and maybe even feel a bit isolated by this. As communists obviously we oppose the institution of marriage as a historic expression of patriarchy and therefore favor its dismantlement but the social conservatives that oppose LGBT emancipation feel very differently, needless to say. They raise sanctity of marriage to the gods and therefore they see any threat to their idealization of it as a threat to their political hegemony.

So whether or not this goes very far as far as the amelioration of LGBT oppression goes, any legislation in favor homosexual marriage rights is a defeat for the forces of reaction even if it isn't a long-term victory for us.

[DancingEmma]

Indeed. While this doesn't really scratch the surface of the issues surrounding LGBT oppression, I think it still constitutes a symbolic victory. It might make LGBT groups and individuals feel less isolated and so this might serve as a morale boost for them to keep up or even intensify the struggle against unjust social relations of sexuality.

I hope you are right about this, Austin. As a queer woman active in these struggles, I hope this does energize other LGBTQ people to continue the fight for more and more ambitious goals. I do sometimes worry about this, though, because same sex marriage is often framed by more assimilationist, liberal types as the "final step" of our movement, in the same way some liberals believe the civil rights legislation of the 1960s or the election of Barack Obama created a "post-racial" society. This doesn't mean that same sex marriage shouldn't be legal, of course, and some of this is probably just an inevitable step along the path. One problematic aspect about this type of legislation, though, is that it increases the ability of the ruling class to further co-opt the rich, white, cis gay male leaders in the LGBT movement--men whose lives are beginning more and more to resemble those of their elite straight counterparts.

It could possibly serve as a wedge against the anti-LGBT bigots who may feel like they suffered a defeat and maybe even feel a bit isolated by this. As communists obviously we oppose the institution of marriage as a historic expression of patriarchy and therefore favor its dismantlement but the social conservatives that oppose LGBT emancipation feel very differently, needless to say. They raise sanctity of marriage to the gods and therefore they see any threat to their idealization of it as a threat to their political hegemony. So whether or not this goes very far as far as the amelioration of LGBT oppression goes, any legislation in favor homosexual marriage rights is a defeat for the forces of reaction even if it isn't a long-term victory for us.

This point I can whole-heartedly agree with! I have a visceral distaste for religious fundamentalists, and so anything that serves to demoralize them is bound to give me a little thrill. The sooner that their traditional, family values crap has been relegated to the trash bin of history, the better.

[Left Voice]

Interesting article to read. It's really fascinating to me how the push for same-sex marriage has become increasingly mainstream over the years, to the point where conservatives can argue it's a move to "strengthen, not weaken, the institution." 20 years ago, even 10 years ago, this sort of rhetoric would have been unimaginable, I think.

We should be careful before giving too much credit to the Conservative frontbenchers who are in support of this, because it's more of a case of political manoeuvring than actual support. I know that same sex marriage is still a politically loaded issue in the United States, but there is much greater popular support for same-sex marriage in the UK. Even the right-wing in the UK are bemused by the debate in the US and how the Republicans are finding themselves on the wrong side of history over the issue.

This is what the Conservative frontbenchers fear, and this is the basis for their support for same-sex marriage. The frontbenchers know that the long-term relevance of the party lies in staying on the right side of history regarding these issues, whereas the backbenchers who have voted against the bill represent the true nature of the Conservative party. In the last election, the Conservatives were very successful in convincing the LGBT community that they were on their side, but this vote has show the true colours of the party - an overwhelming majority of backbenchers voted against the bill.

Saying that, this is still a massive step forward. I share your feelings regarding marriage as an institution, but I think in the current context, this is a massive victory not just for the LGBT community, but anybody who believes in quality.