David Cameron gave a stirring speech at the annual Conservative
Party conference last month in support of the coalition's
consultation over legalising same-sex marriage, planned for March
next year. Whilst inside party delegates cheered, beyond the
conference walls a recent poll from online organization ComRes
suggests not all of the Tory faithful support the move - the survey
suggests that up to 54% of church-going Christians (the Tories'
traditional voting pool) would be less likely to vote Conservative
if the government pushes gay-marriage through parliament ahead of
the 2015 general election.
Outwardly, it looks like a tentative step towards political
suicide, but is it really the risk it appears? Firstly, we should
applaud David Cameron for standing up and saying he is
"emphatically" in favour of the change to legalise gay-marriage -
for a PM to do so twenty years ago would have been unthinkable. But
let's not get carried away in thinking Cameron is the new messiah
for gay-rights.
To start, his support of gay marriage has followed something of
a 4-point turn; back in 2000 he accused the Labour government of
being "against family values"' by advocating "the promotion of
homosexuality in schools," when they began measures to repeal the
Tory-implemented Section 28 legislation in November 2003. Section
28 famously banned local education authorities from promoting the
acceptability of homosexuality - that is, from saying it's "okay"
to be gay, which it is, by the way.
Despite doggedly defending Section 28 until its death, Cameron's
attitude towards gay rights have gradually softened. In 2004 he
voted in favour of Civil Partnerships for same sex couples and he
did eventually apologise publicly for Section 28. But no one's
perfect; his gay rights record took another knock in 2008 when he
voted against allowing lesbians the right to IVF - well I guess
we've made our choice, right?
Seriously though, Cameron's support of Lord Ali's amendment to
the 2004 Civil Partnership act and his subsequent championing of
the rights of same-sex couples to marry - one Downing Street Aid
said Mr Cameron "personally intervened" - have been major
commendations for his pink credentials. And it's flattering to
think he thinks there will one day be a gay PM (a Tory, no
less).
But the idea of David Cameron as a gay trail-blazer is something
a little more difficult to stomach - he's a little bit slow off the
mark for one. Liberal Democrat leader and Deputy PM Nick Clegg
vocalised his support for gay marriage back in July 2009 (it became
official party policy on 21 September 2010). And the Labour Party
became the second major party to be led by a gay marriage advocate
when they elected Ed Miliband as party leader back in September
2010.
In fact, more minor parties like the Green Party have it in
their manifesto, whilst nationalist parties the SNP and Plaid Cymru
also advocate same-sex marriage. Looking at it, to not support gay
marriage left the Conservatives in the company of political parties
like the BNP. (Nick Griffin finds gays "creepy", FYI. Ditto to you,
Nick.)
If everyone else is going to do it anyway, you might as well get
in on the act, right? In 2011, for this reason, it's perhaps the
least politically risky time to adopt such a (still controversial)
policy; there are no looming elections with which this announcement
could trigger his political demise. And like I said - if everyone's
doing it…
Personally, I don't think we should kid ourselves into thinking
Cameron's support for gay-marriage is the grand and sweeping
gesture towards equality it's been claimed, after all he said
himself "it's also about something else: commitment". And it's
here, to pick up on Mel Steel's point in her article Cameron: A
friend to the Gays? the real benefit to Conservatism
gay-marriage offers becomes apparent - marriage is the "most
essentially conservative institution, licensed by state and
sanctified by church to protect property (including, historically,
women and children) and inheritance rights".
Cameron's talk of "the ties that bind us", vows and commitment
is not some stuffy version of sexy-talk; it allows him to side step
any controversial and uncomfortable romantic associations with
marriage - and thereby the validity of same-sex love, the thing
that gay-rights activists have really campaigned for - by glossing
over it.
Moreover, the Conservative vision for society hinges on marriage
and any marriage, be it gay or straight, is better than no marriage
in this view. By drawing us in an organising us like our
heterosexual counterparts, we're being tempted over from the
'dark-side' of single mothers, non-nuclear families and the
socially marginalised (read:undesirable) with whom for so long
we've been grouped. Forgive me then for thinking of the dog being
petted where previously it's been kicked.
"I don't support gay marriage despite being a Conservative"
Cameron proclaimed, "I support gay marriage because I'm
Conservative". Personally, I support gay-marriage because I believe
equality is a human right - lets just hope the two justifications
don't become blurred in the course of political history.
