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”
roggy1
so what?
If something never existed before, it should never exist in the future?
That stance could be quite a hindrance to progress of any kind.
(ps and for “slightly” you really should have put “entirely”, unless you still feel you own your wife as property)
Mike Stallard
I want to cut to the chase.
I used to believe that all the old ideas of marriage and the superiority of men over women and the difference between the sexes was all out of date. This belief survived my having four children of my own.
Only recently, with the birth of my grandchildren, did I come to appreciate the massive difference between the sexes. Time and time again it has been the grannie, and indeed every single other woman I met even in the street, who cooed over the wee bairn. Men were polite and pretended. But then they withdrew.
In hospital recently a male nurse was, frankly, being professional looking after my wife – until I brought up politics. Then he burst into enthusiastic response!
The enormous difference between men and women is something which has been grossly underrated. Even Harriet Harman said that she did not want to be Prime Minister because she wanted to spend time with her family.
Actually the idea that man and man can get married I now believe to be unnatural. I know that is not what I was taught to say at any of the Universities I have been to. I can see my tutors shrinking in disbelief. Before you shoot off a disgusted reply, though, I simply ask you to take a look for yourself and see if my own revelation was not convincing.
Sorry for the long reply!
R34lly
Of course since the announcement of her appointment she has back-tracked completely, as her boss, Nicky Morgan, has already done. She now fully supports the Conservative Party and Goverment position and that of her new boss. When questioned as to why she voted against it in the first place she has used the excuse that at the time she had received 500 objection letters from the most rabid of her constituents. 500 out of how many thousands? So, apparently it wasn’t even a personal conviction choice and she took no countenance of the many people who didn’t object to it, according to public opinion polls at the time, who couldn’t be motivated enough to write to her simply because it did not personally affect them.
All the event does is show her to not be very bright or very insightful. Dues go to those of her Conservative colleagues, such as Cameron, Osborne, Gove, May et all who did put more than about 5 seconds thought into the issue and in all decency did vote in favour for it.
John Lee
Adultery refers to coital intercourse which is not applicable in a civil partnership and hence is not included. But any non-coital sexual behaviour with another individual would clearly be considered “unreasonable behaviour” in both marriage and civil partnerships and so both have the same provisions under law here and thus are equal.
Selohesra
Certainly not just one definition of marriage – but I think common theme of man + woman is quite prevalent. I’d be interested in the details of recognized same sex unions from antiquity considered to be marriage as opposed to relationships