Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Is it a waste of public money that an MP calls for gay marriage referendum? Watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Treeroy)
    Since when has marriage been a "basic human right"? :facepalm:
    Equality is a basic human right.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by infairverona)
    Try telling this to the ECtHR...
    Out of curiosity, what do you think the ECHR has said about gay marriage?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by flying plum)
    Out of curiosity, what do you think the ECHR has said about gay marriage?
    Quite a condescending tone, I didn't imply that the ECtHR has said anything about gay marriage and I have studied EU law this year. I would imagine it would be classed as discriminatory in the same way it is in employment, though, and my tutor has expressed agreement to this.

    [e] Just seen you've done law also. I assumed you were going to start saying I only believe the media or something, a surprising amount of non-law students like to try and tell me things I already know/aren't true about law..
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by infairverona)
    Quite a condescending tone, I didn't imply that the ECtHR has said anything about gay marriage and I have studied EU law this year. I would imagine it would be classed as discriminatory in the same way it is in employment, though, and my tutor has expressed agreement to this.

    [e] Just seen you've done law also. I assumed you were going to start saying I only believe the media or something, a surprising amount of non-law students like to try and tell me things I already know/aren't true about law..
    No, I was just asking for the detail behind your statement - my reading was that you implied that the court had ruled that absence of gay marriage was in violation of convention rights which, to the best of my limited knowledge, is not true. Apologies if this was not your implication.

    Interestingly, a test case was being brought to Strasbourg on the civil partnership-marriage divide, with a straight couple wanting a CP and a same sex couple wanting a civil marriage, but I don't know what became of it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    David Burrowes is a waste of space.

    (Original post by flying plum)
    No, I was just asking for the detail behind your statement - my reading was that you implied that the court had ruled that absence of gay marriage was in violation of convention rights which, to the best of my limited knowledge, is not true. Apologies if this was not your implication.

    Interestingly, a test case was being brought to Strasbourg on the civil partnership-marriage divide, with a straight couple wanting a CP and a same sex couple wanting a civil marriage, but I don't know what became of it.
    The court ruled that
    - the language of the ECHR defines marriage as mixed-sex only, and while in principle they are happy to reinterpret this to include same-sex marriage at some time in the future, because there is so much disparity between different ECHR signatory states on the issue they aren't prepared to do so today.
    - UK civil partnerships are not a convention right, and are therefore beyond their jurisdiction
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mmmpie)
    The court ruled that
    - the language of the ECHR defines marriage as mixed-sex only, and while in principle they are happy to reinterpret this to include same-sex marriage at some time in the future, because there is so much disparity between different ECHR signatory states on the issue they aren't prepared to do so today.
    - UK civil partnerships are not a convention right, and are therefore beyond their jurisdiction
    Yes, I know the Austria judgment. I don't know what basis the test case was being brought - the litigator mentions it briefly in a talk about something else. I guess art 8 and/or art 12 with art 14. Whether it would have had any chance of success is anyone's guess. I didn't think it seemed likely, but there you go.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It is a waste of time, aswell as cash.

    Bigger issue however is that he's suggesting human rights up for a common vote.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Why bother?

    The majority of parliament support it as about 66% of MPs voted in favour of it, and opinion polls show that near enough the same percentage of the public support it.

    This just seems like a tactic to slow down the process. I'm not going to speculate as to why as i'd imagine most people could guess why.

    But yes a referendum on a subject in which near enough has the same levels of support from MPs and the publics would be a waste of time and money.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    To answer the OP, money is wasted by our government on much less important issues.

    This is an important issue, so no, the money is not being wasted.


    (Original post by Eljamaispa)
    It's stupid anyway. I won't go into it because I'll get angry. There are other things to worry about FFS.
    If there are other things to worry about why did the government bring the issue up in the first place?

    (Original post by infairverona)
    It's 2013 for crying out loud, there shouldn't even BE a referendum on it.
    Yawn, that old chestnut again.

    (Original post by BBC_News_Video)
    In five or ten years time, you'll actually feel a little bit rueful, that you got yourself on the wrong side of a social change
    Nonsense.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Very Important Poster
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by ufo2012)
    If there are other things to worry about why did the government bring the issue up in the first place?
    The initial bill I consider to be a relevant issue. But there are things more in need of referendums

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mmmpie)
    The court ruled that
    - the language of the ECHR defines marriage as mixed-sex only, and while in principle they are happy to reinterpret this to include same-sex marriage at some time in the future, because there is so much disparity between different ECHR signatory states on the issue they aren't prepared to do so today.
    - UK civil partnerships are not a convention right, and are therefore beyond their jurisdiction
    For once the EU deserve a +1
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I think a referendum would be an absolute waste of money, in that a referendum shouldn't have to even be held on this issue. People who argue against gay marriage by mentioning the religious value of marriage, well:

    a) marriage was initially not a religious thing,
    b) the UK is a secular state, meaning the CoE and the state are separate entities, one may not influence the other, and
    c) churches and other religious institutions are not being forced into marrying people against their wishes; the bill implies that religious institutions would be able to marry them if they wanted to, which would be recognised by the state as equally as a heterosexual couple's marriage.

    Just pass a bill to give all people equal rights and we're sorted here.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ufo2012)
    For once the EU deserve a +1
    At the risk of being a pedant, the EU is not the same thing as the ECtHR (European Court of Human Rights). They are separate institutions, governed by completely different sets of legal framework. The main link is that, in order to be a member of the EU, you have to be a signatory state to the ECHR.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by flying plum)
    Yes, I know the Austria judgment. I don't know what basis the test case was being brought - the litigator mentions it briefly in a talk about something else. I guess art 8 and/or art 12 with art 14. Whether it would have had any chance of success is anyone's guess. I didn't think it seemed likely, but there you go.
    You're right, that was Austria. I'm blurring cases together. There was an obiter in that one where the court explicitly recognised same-sex relationships as being 'family life' too.

    One thing which will be interesting is to see if the ECtHR considers same-sex marriage to be protected under article 14 in those states which have legalised it, although that's probably more of a theoretical problem.

    (Original post by ufo2012)
    For once the EU deserve a +1
    Why? The ECtHR isn't part of the EU.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ufo2012)


    Yawn, that old chestnut again.

    .
    Well it might be an old chestnut but the issue remains...yes a lot of people say things like "oh in this day and age we shouldn't need this" but it's true. We have done away with racial segregation in the law, we protect the disabled, why should gay marriage still be an issue to this day? It's very outdated. So it might be an 'old chestnut' but obviously as nothing has been done about it, what do you expect? :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by infairverona)
    Spot on. Absolutely spot on.
    I really cannot fathom why people think it's ok for gay people to be discriminated against when we are so sensitive to racism. It's not ok. Ever. At all. Needs to be changed.
    I agree with you. I’m a person of a different minority ethnic background and any form of homophobia whether covert or not is quite personal to me because I feel as though both racism and homophobia fall into the same category as in both cases a minority is being discriminated against. In my opinion denying someone the right to marry is a covert way of being homophobic because it's nobody else's business whether someone gets married or not.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wildrover)
    What a shambles, this shouldn't even be on the table until we have had our EU In/Out referendum.
    I dont see the point of the EU In/Out referendum because many people can sometimes be resistant to change and coming out of the EU will change things. I don't really see much benefit of coming out of the EU.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by infairverona)
    It's 2013 for crying out loud
    (Original post by infairverona)
    Well it might be an old chestnut but the issue remains...obviously as nothing has been done about it, what do you expect? :rolleyes:
    'It's 2013 for crying out loud' - so what. It could be 2023 and we could still have similar or even the same issues.

    The year means nothing, it is just a number. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Errr are we still living in the cave men times? Why cant gay people marry just because certain straight people have a problem with it

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ufo2012)
    'It's 2013 for crying out loud' - so what. It could be 2023 and we could still have similar or even the same issues.

    The year means nothing, it is just a number. :rolleyes:
    Well we could but I'd like to think in 10 years time we will be sitting and laughing at how ridiculous it was the same way as we find it ridiculous today that once upon a time, black people weren't allowed to sit down on the bus...the year might mean nothing to you but every year that passes and this hasn't changed probably means a lot to gay people. Perhaps it doesn't affect you directly so you can't see past it :rolleyes:
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.