Caroline Dinenage wrote to constitutents voicing her opposition to equal marriage
David Cameron’s cabinet reshuffle continues today, with the appointment of Caroline Dinenage to the post of minister for equalities. Dinenage retained her Gosport seat in the election, and is part of Cameron’s new drive to increase the number of women at the Cabinet table.
But a look at Dinenage’s voting record raises questions about her suitability for the job.
In 2013 she voted against the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill at its Second Reading in the House of Commons. She voted for other components of the bill in order to stay loyal to the Tory party line, and was absent for the Bill’s Third Reading.
But there is no ambiguity in Dinenage’s comments on the issue. Responding to a letter from a PinkNews reader the day before the reading, she wrote:
“As you may know, as the established Church, its own Canon Law is part of the law of the land and one of its canons states that marriage is in its nature a union of “one man and one woman”.
I therefore believe that the institution of marriage is distinctive and the State has no right to redefine its meaning – these proposals were not included in any of the three main manifestoes nor did it feature in the Coalition’s Programme for Government.
“As I have mentioned, under current law same-sex couples can have a civil partnership but not a civil marriage and I believe that there is no legitimate reason to change this. Preventing same-sex couples from being allowed to ‘marry’ takes nothing away from their relationship.”
She also told a local newspaper:
‘I’m concerned that in the future teachers may be forced to teach civil partnership and gay marriage whether it’s in their religious belief to do so or not.”
Further back, in 2011, Dinenage was listed by the Daily Mail as one of 118 Tory MPs who had written to constituents stating their opposition to proposals to allow gay marriage. The Mail reported at the time:
“The sheer scale of the opposition means Mr Cameron is facing what has become the biggest Tory rebellion in recent history.”
The list included Cameron’s former equalities minister Nicky Morgan, who also voted against gay marriage.
Is there something the PM isn’t quite getting?
Ruby Stockham is a staff writer at Left Foot Forward. Follow her on Twitter
107 Responses to “‘No legitimate reason’ for same-sex marriage: meet the new equalities minister”
Sophia Marsden
Don’t pretend. The law on marriage is a precursor to “discrimination” cases against people who don’t wish to recognise those fake marriages as we have seen with florists, bakeries, photographers, employment health insurance purchasers, schools who teach that homosexuality is a sin and so on.
Jeanne Tomlin
They are not ‘fake marriages’. And what business do schools have telling my children what is and is not a sin? That is not the business of schools. Schools teach reading, math, etc. If they started forcing religion on my children, they’d see me in court. However, there is NO law that keeps religions from teaching that they think single sex marriage is a sin. No minister who preaches that will be sued.
No, businesses do not have a right to discriminate against me because I am gay any more than they have a right to hang “No blacks served here” on the wall. You selling me a cake does not mean you approve of my marriage if I am gay any more than it does if you sell one to someone who is remarrying if you don’t believe in divorce. Do Catholics who believe divorce is a sin question their clients to be sure they were never previously married? Of course not. This is the most ridiculous argument ever made. I don’t know and don’t care whether someone I HIRE approves of my marriage and no such approval is implied.
Get over yourself that your religion has the right to rule the world. This nation is NOT a theocracy.
Sophia Marsden
The business of schools is many things, some schools pride themselves on secular values, some schools pride themselves on technical excellence and some schools pride themselves on adherence to traditional morality and I believe all different kinds of school should be allowed to exist and flourish. Muslim schools, Christian schools, Humanist schools, Zoroastrian schools – every parent should be able to teach their children according to their own values.
Catholic schools in the UK were challenged immediately after same sex marriage came in to change their sex ed curriculum to state that the new imitation of marriage was equal to real marriage.
I wouldn’t sell a wedding cake to someone divorced, why should I. Even though I find racism abhorrent I do not think a racist should be forced against their will to provide a service for someone either. It’s ridiculous, there is no such think as private enterprise if any business can be forced to serve someone or a group of people by the state. I am not a libertarian by any means, but there is a clear violation of the right to private property there. If a company is publicly traded it can be said to be property of the public to some extent, but private individuals in their personal business dealings should be free to associate and disassociate with whomever they please.
If I was interested in ruling the world I would go about things very differently. I am only seeking to live my own life in accordance with those things I know to be true. I don’t *care* what the law says when it contradicts those things because it has no authority when it contradicts truth. And further I will stand up for everyone who peacefully tries to live by their own values, even when they are wrong – I will stand up for the people condemned for refusing a blood donation for their children, because even though I see nothing wrong with blood donations it I believe people have a right to a family life and to live by their conscience therein, I will stand up for the people with polygamous marriages because even though I think they are inferior I think they have a right to all the legal protections that recognition of their marriages affords them and their children, I will stand up for those who wish to teach their children that it is haram to befriend the kaffir even though I am a kaffir, and those who refuse to work on the Sabbath even though I am not a Jew – in Uganda I will stand up for those put to death because of their homosexual practices, in Russia I will stand up for those tortured and imprisoned for teaching that homosexuality is *not* a sin, even though I believe it is. Because I believe in freedom, and freedom isn’t some petty thing which only stretches as far as your feelings or the particular social mores of a society, freedom means we all get to live more or less according to our consciences, unless our conscience tells us to go murdering or raping or pillaging. Freedom means that within specific communities very restrictive forms of life can flourish. Freedom means that you don’t force people to sell you things, even if they don’t want to for awful reasons. Freedom means sometimes people die who could have lived because people make bad choices. Freedom means a thousand flowers blooming, without anyone getting to say where or how or why or what those flowers should look like. Freedom is the Amish and the Mormons and the Catholics and the Humanists somehow managing to build a country together.
And you’re all triumphalist now, you haters of freedom, but one day the tide of public opinion will turn against you and you’ll hate the precedents you set when you sold freedom out for “progress”. Mark my words.
When that day comes I’ll stand up for you like I stand for those charged with homosexual acts in Uganda.
Jeanne Tomlin
What you think has nothing to do with the law. And for THAT I am thankful. You may believe that blacks should still be turned away from lunch counters and have urine thrown on them for attending schools where they are not wanted. I do not.
Nor do I think it was right imprisoning my people for simply existing and denying us the right to marry the person of our choice. And I frankly don’t give a damn if you think my marriage is ‘fake’ as long as it is recognised in law.
And once you open a business doing business with the PUBLIC then you are obliged to serve the public. If you only want to serve your own little ‘in group’ who are holy enough for you, then don’t make it a public business.
Sophia Marsden
Like I said, one day the machine will turn on you and you’ll regret selling it our freedom.