David Cameron: If Marriage Is Good Enough For Straights, It’s Good Enough For Everyone

I am absolutely determined that this Coalition government will follow in that tradition by legislating for gay marriage in this parliament.

I make that point not only as someone who believes in equality but as someone who believes passionately in marriage. I think marriage is a great institution—I think it helps people to commit, it helps people to say that they’re going to care and love for another person. It helps people to put aside their selfish interests and think of the union that they’re forming.

It’s something I feel passionately about and I think if its good enough for straight people like me, it’s good enough for everybody and that’s why we should have gay marriage and we will legislate for it…

I run an institution,  the Conservative Party, which for many many years got itself on the wrong side of this argument, it locked people out who were naturally Conservative from supporting it and so I think I can make that point to the Church, gently…

I passionately believe that all institutions need to wake up to the case for equality, and the Church shouldn’t be locking out people who are gay, or are bisexual or are transgender from being full members of that Church, because many people with deeply held Christian views, are also gay. And just as the Conservative Party, as an institution, made a mistake in locking people out so I think the Churches can be in danger of doing the same thing.”

UK Prime Minister David Cameron, making the conservative case for marriage equality, at a reception for LGBT advocates at 10 Downing Street.

Source: Pink News. Photo: 10 Downing Street


Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #conservativeparty #davidcameron #england stories and more


  • PJ

    He might fuck up everything else he touches, but he actually seems to be passionate about this issue.

  • Steve-O

    Not really, David Cameron is the kind of politician who supports everyrthung, but believes in nothing.

  • KW

    @Steve-O: I have no opinion on whether or not your statement is true, but but whether or not Cameron BELIEVES in this, it’s beneficial if he acts like he does, and once marriage rights are enacted in law, they’re a lot harder to repeal.

    Just one more step towards disempowering the church. Surprised though, as just 6 months ago Cameron was proudly crowing that “Britain is a Christian nation”.

  • Colin

    They already have Civil Partnerships in the U.K., which grant full equality. There is absolutely no need to push this issue on the U.K.

  • Colin

    @KW: Why should the Church be disempowered if gays have equality?

  • MK Ultra

    @Colin: the church needs to be disempowered as it has already gained way too much power and religion and faith stepped out the door a long time time ago.
    It’s now a tyrannt and like any good tyrannt, they know that control of sex, sexuality and reproduction is one of the most powerful tools you can have.
    That is the church’s only concern in social issues – control.
    The idsue will be pushed. Legal marriage equality will come to the UK.
    The church can go fuck itself.
    Don’t like it? Too bad.

  • fagburn

    Odd how right-wing people in the UK are so thrilled by gay marriage…
    Well, obviously, it’s not.

  • Daez

    @KW: The poles shifted and he followed the poles. Sounds like something good ole’ Mittens is known for.

    @Colin: Except that marriage is just a word and should be applied equally? Seriously, there is no reason why a civil union should not be able to be called a marriage. The definitions of words change constantly. That is what language is all about. However, calling a gay civil union marriage helps to legitimize it. Also, because of the way that these civil partnerships in England work, they can not be legitimized by a minister where as marriages can, and that hurts people that want a church wedding in a confirming congregation. I support their right to want this even if I HIGHLY disagree with it.

  • Sohobod

    Oh do shut up, you terrible lefty bore.

  • Kev C

    David Cameron has taken a stronger stance on gay rights than any previous PM and he deserves credit for it.

  • Sheogorath

    If you think about it, under the Third Reich, disabled people were killed, then gay people, then everybody else the Nazis didn’t like. Now, under the current coalition, the WCA is being used to kill disabled people… Does anyone else see the pattern that’s emerging? I’ll accept that Cameron believes in equality only when his actions speak as loudly as his words.

  • GOProudest

    Look at all you left-wing tools. Upset that the Conservative Leader supports gay marriage?

    No wonder nobody takes your whining seriously.

  • KW

    @Colin: you asked “Why should the Church be disempowered if gays have equality?”

    Because the church is the largest performer of marriages in the UK, and many have made it clear that they will refuse to perform gay weddings. In doing so, they unequivocally nailed their coilours to the mast, and in taking this action, Cameron is clearly defying the pressure that the church inappropriately bought to bear upon public policy.

    The less people need to turn to the church for anything in their lives, the more they will become marginalised, and the more people will realise how utterly obsolete belef in 3000 year old fairy tales is.

    It’s my bet that the church will quickly change their policies and modernise rather than allow this to happen, which will then reveal them to be hypocrites as well as homophobes. They deservedly lose either way. The only way that they could have won, was to have offered fulsome support before the announcement. Now the chance is gone.

  • B

    No. 12 · GOProudest wrote, “Look at all you left-wing tools. Upset that the Conservative Leader supports gay marriage?”

    Very funny. David Cameron could not be nominated for dog catcher in a Republican primary. Read for a quote of his on health care: “If you’re worried that we’re going to sell off the NHS or create some American-style private system, we will not do that,” followed by “In this country we have the most wonderful, precious institution and also precious idea that whenever you’re ill … you can walk into a hospital or a surgery and get treated for free, no questions asked, no cash asked. It is the idea at the heart of the NHS, and it will stay. I will never put that at risk.”

    Basically, David Cameron supports what U.S. conservatives would call “socialized medicine.” Now it seems he supports smae-sex marriage. Republicans would call him a “San Francisco liberal” or whatever the insult du jour is if he were running for office here.

  • Patsy Stoned

    B, I completely agree. David Cameron would be considered an ultra-leftist in the realm of US politics, which just shows how extreme the right-wing has become.

    I just love that he said that just as anti-gay POS Mitt Romney showed up in London.

  • Say What?


    No wonder nobody takes your ANYTHING seriously.

  • SteveB MKE

    Who cares if ANY church recognize gay marriage? I am only concerned with the benefits it delivers me for taxes, partner rights ect. as a member of a race of people. If you get married in a church, you still have to sign a state document for it to be legal for the rights I care about. That is the issue gays need to be concerned with, not if a religion or cult allows it. It is a human rights issue and race issue not a religious one. Fine if you want to chastise a church for not being inclusive just give me the legal rights first….

  • Blah, Blah...huh?

    Obvious thread attracts obvious trolls GOPunk and Sohobod, obviously.

  • GOProudest

    @Blah, Blah…huh?: You say this as if that’s a bad thing!

  • Truth Wins

    American conservatives are such outliers (thanks to Reagan’s getting rid of the communications Fairness Doctrine) that even conservatives in other countries are more liberal than some Democrats here.

  • Truth Wins

    @Blah, Blah…huh?: GOProudest, Barefoot Accountant, Jeff4Justice, and Nestor, are all the same person. This problem comes up again and again on any political Queerty story. Watch and be amused. Barefoot Accountant will be cutting and pasting a long list of nonsense soon!

  • Blah, Blah...huh?

    @GOProudest: Actually, I didn’t say it like that. There you go making the interwebs all about you again. Who is your sock puppet talking to now? Is this person a real person and not a nested pearl script? I’m sure it doesn’t matter to you, the unintentional nihilist of Queerty.
    @Truth Wins: This one is probably in Jasons’ workgroup. Can you imagine a life lived like that? Cribbing your gay stereotypes from an obvious psychotic with messianic delusions, then trying to pass them in troll posts to appear “natural”? You’re 100% correct, it is hilarious and tragic at the same time. Hetero “men” have the stupidest of the inbreds repping them everywhere this election season, conforming to the directives of the insane must really hurt their egos in the long run…it’s sad really.

  • Analog

    @Kev C: He was “passionately” anti gay rights for most of his parliamentary career – he’s only pro-gay rights now… or rather, solely pro-gay marriage (as this has clearly become a cause he can embrace in order to seem human, while at the same time systematically shitting all over the lower classes in this country).
    All the rights we’ve won over the last 13 years of the previous Labour government were opposed pretty much by Cameron’s party.
    He’s on the right side of the issue now only because the rest of society moved on long ago and he knows it’s now political expedient for him to do so.
    I’d rather trust – and save my praise for – the politicians who fought for us long, long before it was advantageous for them.
    Cameron’s a shill and if he feels so “passionately” about an issue which only a few years ago he was so clearly against, either his passions are more like whims or… ooh, he just maybe talking bollocks for political gain.

  • Aliberry

    I like this,david cameron has spoken like a real man

  • GOProudest

    @Blah, Blah…huh?: I am definitely a “nested pearl script”.

    Damn, my cover is blown! Abort the mission!

  • Kev C

    @Analog: Yes, he has changed his position. When he was in the benches he was anti-gay. But now that he has power, he’s pro-gay .. with balls.

    And he isn’t getting “political gain”. He’s been criticized by anti-gays in religion and internationally, and by liberals. I mean, for crying out loud, liberal politicos would rather join sides with Robert Mugabe and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than compliment a conservative politician who does something right.

  • Blah, Blah...huh?

    @GOProudest: Funky, flop-sweaty comment. Finally we’re getting something real out of you. When the waves of raw emotion wash over you from such an abrupt turn towards the truth, try not to get giddy here OK? Just trust me, shunning isn’t “nice”, or well meaning, like your sado-masochistic born again parents told you. These queens won’t flinch when they let you have it, bucko. Try a little, and listen for once in your life.

  • Ewan

    He is a right wing shitehawk that I wouldn’t cross the road to piss on if he were on fire. He throws in this nugget of tactical false support in a vain attempt to distract from his trampling of working class people in this country, and also to distract from the fact that his party is still riddled with slavering bigots (the party that introduced the abomination that was section 28.) Tories are vermin.

  • nineinchnail

    Ewan? As in Tony B-liar’s son? Wasnt it the Tories who reduced the age of consent to 18. That gay anti-Tory rubbish is SO 1993. If you want to blame ANYONE for the UK economic mess you can blame Labour.

    Back on topic I applaud David Cameron as a Tory, even though I think he’s a bit wet.

  • Kev C

    The political Left in the UK and the US ignored gay rights for a very long time. It was only until 2009 (after Lady Gaga was invented) that the Left even noticed gays. The Huffington Post only added a Gay Voices section 6 months ago, and now their site it plastered (pinkwashed) with gay stories, along with the usual tit-illation stories. Only after gay kids started committing suicide in large numbers did the Left notice gays. Tony Blair and Bill Clinton did nothing for gays. Tony Blair is a Catholic now. And Bill Clinton should be called an enemy of gay rights. It’s HIS signature on DOMA and DADT. But now that they are out of power, they can afford to be pro-gay!!

  • tdww

    He supports gay marriage and yet deports gay asylum seekers and cuts vital sexual health services. His coalition government is disastrous and giving us gay marriage won’t make us vote for his shambolic party.

  • tdww

    @Kev C: That is ridiculous. You clearly know nothing about the “political left”. The Labour government in the UK did more to advance gay rights in the UK than any other government in the country’s history. Those groups on the more extreme left (like the Socialist Worker) and the Trades Union Movement have always been vociferous supporters of gay rights in Britain. For decades.

  • Kev C

    @tdww: US immigration policy also is allowed to deport gays. Cameron also has put political and financial pressure on anti-gay countries, and pledged money to support ending anti-gay laws.

  • Ewan

    @nineinchnail: You are aware that there are more people in the world by the name of Ewan than Tony Blair’s revolting kid don’t you? Your patter’s rotten.

    With regard to labour, I blame them just as much as I blame the tories. They serve the same agenda – the enrichment of the capitalist class at the expense of the rest of us. The one good thing that came out the rodents that were Kinnock and Blair was that they shattered, at last, the illusion that there’s any real difference between between the two parties.

    As for “so 1993”? I didn’t leave secondary education until ten years after that and I can assure that me and the other gay students at my god awful school were still feeling the effects of the disgusting legislation your vile party put in place, and the attitudes that they engendered. If you’re a gay tory, you should be utterly ashamed of yourself. This is hyperbole, of course. Tories have no shame.

  • Analog

    @tdww: Exactly – and LONG (decades, in fact) before it was politically expedient to do so.
    To say Cameron has “balls” on this issue is equally ridiculous – despite the distortions in the right-wing press about how many in this country oppose gay marriage and what damage this is doing to Cameron, all the trustworthy polls (ie. unbiased) show the majority are pro-marriage equality.
    Cameron is pushing this forward knowing too well that if he didn’t take a lead on this it will be yet another issue (among so many now) that he and his party are seen to be out of touch.
    He’s “passionately” pro gay marriage now for the same reasons he was passionately anti gay RIGHTS for nigh on 20 years previously: pure political advantage.

    Again, I’d rather give my thanks, admiration and vote to those who supported us decades ago LONG BEFORE it was politically advantageous for them do so.
    I rather think that demonstrates a passionate commitment to gay rights, don’t you?
    Rather than the lip service Cameron now pays this single issue after so many years opposing us at every turn.

  • Analog

    @Kev C: If you’re referring to the myth that the UK pledged to stop aid to countries with poor anti-gay records, then:

    Cameron has used this issue to counter his “nasty party” image – while systematically shitting over the lower classes (and god knows how many others) – it’s win win for him. There’s no courage or passion needed.

  • Kev C

    @Analog: “Again, I’d rather give my thanks, admiration and vote to those who supported us decades ago LONG BEFORE it was politically advantageous for them do so”

    Sure I agree. People like Peter Tatchell for instance. Oh wait, Johnny-Come-Liberals don’t like Peter either.

    @Analog: I’m referring to his comments about combating anti-gay laws, in Uganda specifically. “This is an issue where we are pushing for movement, we are prepared to put some money behind what we believe. But I’m afraid that you can’t expect countries to change overnight.”

  • iltman

    @Kev C:
    Kev you say that Tony blair did nothing for glbt people, presumably equalising the age of consent, introducing civil partnerships, allowing gay people to adopt and allowing gay poeple to serve in the armed forces counts as nothing.

  • MartinDK

    Ridiculous discussion. You want equality now, or only equality when left-wing politicians enact it?? I guess you people never changed your point of view?
    He deserves credit for acknowledging the change of opinion on gay issues. Fortunately many people who opposed equality 20 years ago, are in favour now. That can never be bad.

    Gay people are human too. And all human beings have spiritual needs. Those that hate on religion only worship Karl Marx or some other “ism”. It is very good for gay people to be accepted by the different faiths at least so they need not feel bad at their parents funeral etc. Maybe someone finds religion more relevant when death comes closer… Who can say now?

  • Chris

    If cameron delivers equal marriage it will be the first time the tories have advanced rather than reduced gay rights other than their shameful reduction of the age of consent to 18, rather than an equal 16.

    The last labour government delivered:
    equal age of consent
    civil partnerships
    abolition of Section 28
    best of all equal rights in employment and delivery of goods and services.

    If cameron delivers it will be a great thing, all three main UK parties support equal rights, it will only be the Northern Irish government that is still causing problems.

  • Kev C

    @Chris: @iltman:

    >civil partnerships
    Civil partnership was widely supported, including Cameron. Not risky to support.
    >abolition of Section 28
    Also widely supported.
    >serve in the armed forces
    Ruling Labour submitted after a controversial lawsuit in the European Court of Human Rights.
    >equal age of consent
    Another submission to European court decision.

    Lots of arm twisting to get those.

  • kae

    People banging on about what the Tories did in the 80s, section 28 etc, for god’s sake , Thatcher was born in that late 20s, Cameron in the 60’s; he is a totally different generation and it is absurd to blame him and the current generation for what the Tories did back then. Its like saying that Blair and Brown should be blamed and held accountable for the shambles of the Callaghan and Wilson governments in the 70s. Get a grip.

  • GOProudest

    @MartinDK @kae: The Gay Left cares about being Left more than about supporting Gays! To them “gay rights” is just a handy way to bamboozle well-meaning people into supporting insane taxation, regulation and wealth redistribution (means theft).

    Indeed, these people first and foremost are Karl Marx-worshipping scum.

  • Mike

    @tdww: Who cares if he wants to deport asylum seekers? The UK needs to worry about it’s own people first. I don’t care if he is a Tory, he supports gay marriage and no other prime minister has stated that.

  • Analog

    @Kev C: “I’m referring to his comments about combating anti-gay laws, in Uganda specifically. “This is an issue where we are pushing for movement, we are prepared to put some money behind what we believe. But I’m afraid that you can’t expect countries to change overnight.”

    Can you give a link to that pledge of Cameron’s, please?
    So far he’s just played lip serivce or merely referred to “consultations”.
    Very little (ie none) has been done by him or his government on this issue abroad.
    I’d be interested to read the quote, thanks.
    Otherwise i’s just more of his empty BS and political maneuvering.

  • Analog

    @Mike: What about gay asylum seekers who’ll be murdered in their home countries?
    “Who cares?”
    For the last time: the previous Labour government brought in rafts of long overdue rights for gay people, which were systematically opposed by the Tory party and Cameron.
    He now claims to support gay marriage – and ONLY gay marriage – because it’s one of the few things he can pretend to support in the gay rights struggle and jump on the vast advancements WE have made in 40 years (despite his party’s sickening opposal and treatment of (dying) gay people.

    “I don’t care if he is a Tory, he supports gay marriage and no other prime minister has stated that.

    Ah, a one issue voter. And on this particular issue, he’s got you hook line and sinker.
    I wonder how long his “consulation” will last on this? You know the one that already categorically rules out us being able to get married in churches.
    Yeah, equality for all.
    “If it’s good enough for straights, then it’s good enough for gay people… apart from church weddings: they really are too good for gay people, sorry…”

  • Carl 1

    @Kev C: Really? So, he Liberal Democrats haven’t supported gay rights since 1975? Get your facts right before making yourself look stupid, kiddo.

  • Analog

    @Kev C: @Analog: “Again, I’d rather give my thanks, admiration and vote to those who supported us decades ago LONG BEFORE it was politically advantageous for them do so”

    “Sure I agree. People like Peter Tatchell for instance. Oh wait, Johnny-Come-Liberals don’t like Peter either.”

    Peter Tatchell isn’t a politician though, dear.
    If you want to find politicians who supported our cause decades before it was politically expedient for them to do so, you’ll find most of them were in the Labour party.
    I’m more convinced by their “passion” for equal rights than that of someone who spent most of his political life opposing us at every turn.
    Cameron is positioning himself as pro gay marriage now because once Scotland changes the law it’s only a matter of time before we *have to* as well. Not to mention the increasing challenges the government will face from Europe. Add to that the fact that a majority of people in this country supports marriage equality (despite the vocal minority who oppose it) and it’s clear that Cameron knows he has no choice.

    Well, it’s either that or he suddenly became incredibly passionate about gay marriage after spending a lifetime opposing GAY RIGHTS (not just the opportunity for some gay people to get hitched).

    Again, the CONSULTATION has set out before it began that we can’t get married in churches.
    This isn’t equality.
    So much for passion.

  • Analog

    @GOProudest: Move out of the 1950s, dearie. The Red Menace is not hiding under your bed x

    (love the “well meaning people” bit, in a sentence which ends by referring to a whole group of people you don’t know as “scum”, haha. “Those who love freedom” – that’s another great meaningless phrase of the wing-nuts – excellent comedy value)

  • Kev C

    @Analog: Politicians are odious and unnecessary people. For decades, politicians did nothing about advancing gay rights. I know, my family has been fighting for gay rights since the 70’s. And guess what? Most of the gains and advances made for gay equality, gay rights, LGBT causes, were made without the help of the straight community. Without the help of politicians, or the news media, or entertainment industry. Those people have actually been detrimental to gay rights for the last half century or more. We need to recognize these facts.

  • Analog

    @Kev C: Those aren’t facts, they’re generalisations. Many politicians have been helping in the fight for gay rights for decades… none I can think of from the Tory party ever did so before it became politically expedient for them to do so. Quite the contrary. And Cameron was one of those who opposed the fight for equality at every turn… until it became politically expedient for him to change tack. That’s the issue here. We can be happy that all main parties in the UK broadly support gay rights, but let’s not give credit to Cameron and his ilk or believe that he’s suddenly done a complete U turn and is now passionate about people he spent decades treating like second class citizens, at best.

  • Kev C

    @Analog: Hyperbole. Cameron was hardly the boogieman you make him to be. He did change his positions, starting about 8 years ago. Similar to a religious conversion, he has become a strong ally of gay rights. Even if everything else he says may be wrong.

  • LMAO

    @Analog: Well-meaning people are the innocent ones who got bamboozled. Karl Marx worshipping scum are people like you who want to cover up the true commie nature of Democrats.

  • Analog

    @LMAO: Satire is dead. :(

  • Analog

    @Kev C: It just seems a little convenient that he changed his position after most people already had, ie. no one wanted to vote for “the nasty party” anymore – suddenly after a lifetime of voting against us (despite almost certainly knowing many gay people all that time) he does a u turn and becomes passionate about our cause.
    I don’t buy it.
    It’s like a religious conversion if the person in question looked round one day and realised everyone was credulous and didn’t want to know anyone who wasn’t… suddenly that person’s a passionate believer.

    As far as him being a strong ally of gay rights, I’ll believe it when I see some real action behind his words, personally.

  • Ewan

    @LMAO: You clearly don’t actually know what communism is if you think the (from a European perspective,) centre right Democrats, have anything to do with Karl Marx. You are a moron. And wealth redistribution is not theft. It’s a redress of the fundamentally exploitative relationship between labour and capital.

  • KW

    If we all hold onto old enmities due to opposition in the past, it will be WE not our new-found allies who hold back the changes we claim to want. People DO sincerely change opinions, in the face of new evidence and public opinion, and we should have the grace to allow them to do so, provided their actions match their new words. After all, if responding to a pressure front of public opinion was not acceptable, why are we all fighting so hard to create one?

  • Analog

    @KW: They can’t hold back the changes, that’s the bigger point. It’s for that simple reason that politicians like Cameron are now changing their position. Doing a u turn on this issue isn’t unacceptable, but the credit as you say yourself mention should go to those who’ve fought so hard to change our culture, often in the face of outright opposition from politicians like Cameron.
    It’s not about holding on to old enmities, it’s about putting this into its proper perspective.

Comments are closed.