POLL: 71% Of Local Tory Leaders Want David Cameron To Drop Gay Marriage Plan

A new survey of Tory constituency chairmen finds that 71% want Prime Minister David Cameron to abandon his plan to enact same-sex marriage by 2015, according to The Sunday Telegraph.

The survey, a poll of 100 grassroots Conservative Party leaders by ComRes, was requested by the Coalition for Marriage, which opposes any alteration to current laws.

In it, 3% of  the chairs say they’ve gained members over Cameron’s stand, while nearly half report their numbers have dwindled because of it.

Some 73% say marriage equality should not be a priority when the government is facing spending cuts in education, welfare and health. In contrast, 11% agreed with Cameron that it should be addressed now. And overall, 71% of chairmen believe their party members oppose the government’s plan, including 47% who believe members “strongly” object to it.Newly appointed Tory culture minister Maria Miller said, “the state should not stop two people undertaking civil marriage unless there are good reasons, and I believe being gay is not one of them.”

Get Queerty Daily

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


  • 2eo

    It’d be nice to have some of the tories have the backs of the British populace, but they’ve very, very rarely held the common human being with anything but disdain.

    I don’t hold much hope of them carrying the ball without 70% of their own party, given how many of them already want rid of Cameron. Sadly we are in a position where we in the UK are desperate for the coalition to fail and force a general election.

    However, I’m enough of a realist to know that Cameron and the group he has appointed [mostly] are all that stops them regressing completely back to the nasty party of old. As sad as that is, but we’re already talking about token crumbs at this point anyway.

  • alexoloughlin

    I wouldn’t take anything the Telegraph prints as gospel. It’s a right wing hate monger. 71% of Tory activists don’t support equal marriage which doesn’t mean its 71% of Tory MPs who are in government. Equal marriage is coming to the UK whether they like it or not. Comres is influenced by catholic conservatives and skews results to make it appear that there is more opposition than there really is. It refuses to divulge it’s methodology to anyone claiming client privacy. A load of bunk.

  • alexoloughlin

    @2eo: 2e0, Almost all of Labour and Liberal Democrats support equal marriage and a growing number of Tories. You would probably only need a third of the Tories to pass it, not such a large number either. Don’t give up and don’t give in to dishonest polling. Many on the fence in the Tory party will evolve as the debate continues. The hateful vitriole coming from the right wing bigots will only turn people off and persuade them to vote yes. The Tory party can’t afford to retain its label as the nasty party if it wants to win the next election, let alone alienate moderates if it drops equal marriage. Even Lord Ashcroft has warned the party it would be foolish to do so. Don’t forget, there are more openly gay MPs in their party than in the other two combined.

  • Dumdum

    @alexoloughlin: Why does it seem that most Europeans are more tolerant of same sex couples and or Gays in general. America seems like it’s over run with a bunch of butt scratching tobacco chewing hillbillies. Even my own queer brothers and sisters here seem backwards and superficial. I never met more friendly forward thinking people than when I was in Europe. I would live there if I had money. But alas I am stranded in Jethro land.

  • Cam

    This is a poll done by a group against marriage and printed in a paper opposed to it. I would like to see something done by a more non-biased group before believing the numbers.

  • fagburn

    @Cam: Agreed – this was conducted by Coalition 4 Marriage, whose polls on gay marriage always show… hostility to gay marriage!
    Ones in the past have been shown to be bogus – this one was based on a tiny sample.
    That the gay media can present this bigoted twaddle uncritically and unquestioned makes me despair.

  • tavdy79

    If England & Wales don’t get marriage equality within the current parliament, we will in the next.

    The Tories inept mishandling of the economy (the economy is now expected to be stalled until 2018, not 2014 as Osborne originally claimed) combined with their attacks on the disabled and a failure to legalise gay marriage (which has about 2/3 public support here) means that in 2015 Labour will almost definitely win with a major landslide, possibly bigger than Blair’s 1997 victory, severely pruning back the Tories and cutting off the Lib Dems almost at the root. At this point, Labour could win with an Afghan Hound as party leader; in practice Labour’s current leader, Ed Miliband, is a Polish Jew – a definite advantage given Cameron & Osborne’s (accurate IMO) image as a pair of boorish and callous Anglican toffs.

    There could easily be a 2/3 majority in favour of marriage equality after the next election as any new MPs, irrespective of party (with the notable exception of the DUP) are unlikely to be opposed.

  • MikeE

    “In a recent poll, it was discovered that 100% of Americans are against equality of any sort for LGBT people and that prison and death sentences should be brought in to counter the evil effects of the gay agenda.

    This poll was conducted amid a sampling of 100 members of NOM.”

    This is pretty much what the Sunday Telegraph poll means…. in other words, not much.

  • 2eo

    Oops, that’s what I get for not double reading, I missed the ComRes part of the article. Still I think most of what I said can be rescued. We’ll just reduce the 70% figure by a good amount.

    The problem is that all our politicians are worthless pencil pushing lawyers, Labour are not much better, they’re still warmongering right leaning bunch of arrogant pushy bastards and champagne socialists, they just have the advantage of being in opposition with an utter debacle masquerading as a government.

    But maybe I’m just a cynic. At least we don’t have our leader signing into effect laws that allow indefinite detaining without process like America has, we just have a one sided extradition agreement and the ability to lock people up indef..


    Carry on.

  • stadacona

    Marriage is between one man and one woman. Sick of radical leftists constantly trying to rip down society.

  • MikeE

    @stadacona: and between one man and his dead brother’s wife… and between one man and his many wives.. and between one man and his wives and concubines.. and between one man and… well, you get my drift.

    oh you don’t?
    sorry, I was going by the Biblical definition of marriage.

    and by the way, the ONLY people who are “ripping down society” are you fundamentalist christians who insist on turning the western world into a theocracy.

    You’re hysterical..l you criticize the Taliban and radical Muslims.. and then try to impose the EXACT same sort of theocracy here in the Western world.

    You actually make me sick.

  • stadacona

    MikeE – Actually, I’m an atheist. Marriage is between one man and one woman. Anything else is destructive social engineering.

  • Luci

    @stadacona: Proof?

  • MikeE

    @stadacona: pure invention on your part.
    there is absolutely no evidence to show this.

    you’re just a hypocritical homophobe.

    yes, you’re a bigot. admit it.

    “social engineering” is a lovely catch phrase that means nothing.

    ANY change in society can be called “social engineering”.

    For example, allowing women to vote is social engineering.

    Giving blacks their freedom is social engineering.

    Allowing blacks to marry whites is social engineering.

    Removing a husband’s right to beat his wife if she displeases him is social engineering.

    So in other words, you’re entire argument is pure bullsh*t.

  • gjg64

    Having lived in Britain during the bad old days of Clause 28 I can honestly say the Tories have come a long way, even if there are plenty who haven’t.

  • stadacona

    MikeE – Here’s your proof. All male same-sex relationships, that are physically capable, are sexually open to other partners either by mutual agreement or deception. No homosexual relationship has ever produced a child. Gay relationships lack the protector-nurturer dynamic of heterosexual marriage, and thus are doomed to fail. There is no benefit to society of same-gender marriage – it is social engineering to appease a radical faction of loony leftists.

  • MikeE

    @stadacona: Sad, very sad.
    You’re just spewing bullsh*t you pulled out of your a$$ and trying to pass it off as some sort of “fact”.

    First of all, your points:

    not ALL male/male relationships are “sexually open”. No idea which orifice you’re pulling that little “fact” out of. but it’s simply not true.

    It makes absolutely no difference whether a gay relationship can create a child or not. If it DID, then you would have to ban all marriages by infertile couples, or couples too old to produce children. So again, another “fact” your pulling out of your a$$.

    Your “protector/nurturer” thing is also pure bullsh*t. You’re just inventing stuff as you go. You really are coming across as a complete moron.

    There is no benefit to society for ANY form of marriage. Again, your argument simply holds absolutely no fact or truth.

    People like you are pathetic. You try to sound like you actually have a head on your shoulders, but instead, end up sounding like your head is firmly planted up your a$$.

    Good luck finishing grade school.


  • GreatGatsby2011

    @stadacona: Can I just say how refreshing it is to find a bigot who doesn’t couch his bigotry in “God’s law”? It makes it a whole lot easier to argue my point.

    “All male same-sex relationships, that are physically capable, are sexually open to other partners either by mutual agreement or deception.”

    I suppose my first question ought to be how expensive is it to maintain a closed-circuit monitoring system in every bedroom of every gay couple in the world? I imagine it’s quite costly. I hate to break it to you that your system is flawed. I know this may come as a shock to you so you may want to sit down for this, but my husband and I have been in a monogamous relationship for over six years. Sorry to break the bad news to you. Maybe if you hurry you can get a refund for all that monitoring equipment.

    “No homosexual relationship has ever produced a child.”

    Neither has a relationship between a man and a woman who’s gone through menopause. By your logic all barren woman or infertile men should be denied the right to marriage as well since no relationship they have will ever result in a child. And what about heterosexual couples who just plain don’t want a child. Should they also be denied a marriage certificate? Or would an annual tax penalty suffice?

    “Gay relationships lack the protector-nurturer dynamic of heterosexual marriage, and thus are doomed to fail.”

    Because all gay people are exactly the same, right? Are all of them protectors or nurturers? And what of heterosexual couples who view marriage as a partnership of equals sharing an equal part in both protecting and nurturing the family unit? Are they also doomed to fail? Or is it okay because one’s an innie and one’s an outie? Let’s agree to leave this argument in the Stone Age, where it belongs.

    “There is no benefit to society of same-gender marriage”

    And there’s no benefit to society in allowing mouth-breathing Neanderthals (such as yourself) to breed and further taint the human gene pool, and yet (miraculously) I’m not on Capitol Hill advocating the manditory sterilization of you and yours. That’s because I believe in your right to live your life how you see fit, no matter how repulsive I believe that life to be. Please have the same consideration for me and mine.

  • MikeE

    @GreatGatsby2011: LOL you said it better than I, thank-you.
    I just have no patience for the feeble-minded.

  • MikeE

    very interestingly, there IS a study that has shown evidence that there IS a benefit to society of having homosexual individuals present.
    a very interesting study done following an isolated south american tribe, where gay individuals often served as nannies and surrogate parents, thus freeing up the parents to forage or work… the study showed that family units with homosexual members thrived more so than those without.

    so in that particular case, there IS benefit to a society.

  • NotStr8Acting

    @stadacona: aww whats the matter boo boo, your hetero relationship ended in adultery (48% of hetero relationships face it) divorce (49% of hetero relationships face it) domestic abuse (1 in 4 hetero relationships face it) or any number of other destructive and unhealthy relationship behavioral problems you heteros and your relationships are notorious for. Don’t hate us because we are pursuing love, and the tides are turning in our favor. You ARE losing. You ARE the minority. You ARE a bigot. Now go back to divorce court with your spouse and figuring out how you’ll split your property, while millions of gays enjoy are fab lives.

  • alexoloughlin

    @stadacona: So what about the hetero adulterers, you know, the ones who sleep around, sometimes over and over and there’s such a thing as serial adultery, Newt Gingrich comes to mind, Rudy Giuliani, both claiming to believe in the sanctity of marriage. Who caused that I wonder? Both were committing adultery long before Massachusetts became the first state to legalize same sex civil marriage.

    There are millions of infertile hetero couples who can NEVER produce a child together. What next, ban them too? Idiot!

  • Dumdum

    Homosexuality is Mother Natures birth [email protected]stadacona: Wow a developmentally disabled person that can type. Here are some REAL facts.The American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, and National Association of Social Workers stated in 2006:
    “ Currently, there is no scientific consensus about the specific factors that cause an individual to become heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual—including possible biological, psychological, or social effects of the parents’ sexual orientation. However, the available evidence indicates that the vast majority of lesbian and gay adults were raised by heterosexual parents and the vast majority of children raised by lesbian and gay parents eventually grow up to be heterosexual.

    The Royal College of Psychiatrists stated in 2007:
    “ Despite almost a century of psychoanalytic and psychological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person’s fundamental heterosexual or homosexual orientation. It would appear that sexual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment. Sexual orientation is therefore not a choice.

    The American Academy of Pediatrics stated in Pediatrics in 2004:
    “ Sexual orientation probably is not determined by any one factor but by a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences. In recent decades, biologically based theories have been favored by experts. Although there continues to be controversy and uncertainty as to the genesis of the variety of human sexual orientations, there is no scientific evidence that abnormal parenting, sexual abuse, or other adverse life events influence sexual orientation. Current knowledge suggests that sexual orientation is usually established during early childhood.

    The American Psychological Association states “there are probably many reasons for a person’s sexual orientation and the reasons may be different for different people”, and says most people’s sexual orientation is determined at an early age.[1] Research into how sexual orientation in males may be determined by genetic or other prenatal factors plays a role in political and social debates about homosexuality, and also raises fears about genetic profiling and prenatal testing.

Comments are closed.