Looking forward to seeing how this one pans out. There doesn't seem to be any realistic chance of the vote being lost, but it does look as though it could once again expose the Conservative Party as a refuge for unpleasant bigots.

The letters page of today's Telegraph (can't post a link as my broadband is down - can anyone help?) contains some truly revolting rhetoric from the Tory rank and file. One even makes the comparison with a man marrying a horse. Disgusting. It does seem that the Tory Party is quite divided on the issue, and that can only be a good thing going into the next election (at least, for anyone who earns less than £150k a year). So, long overdue equality legislation is passed, Tories self destruct in the process. What you might call a win-win.

What I don't understand about all this is why right-wingers are so obsessed with other people's genitals and who is sticking what into whom.

rlhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/9848067/Cabinet-ministers-back-Bill-to-allow-same-sex-marriage-because-they-are-Conservatives.htmlrl

Not sure about their real reasons, but their justification is nearly always religious. And yet they walk around with trimmed beards, in mixed-fibre clothing, eating shellfish with gay (pardon the pun) abandon. It's almost as if they pick and choose which of God's laws to obey according to their own prejudices.

Indeed - I would've thought that if you're absolutely opposed to same-sex marriage, those personal objections could be dealt with by simply avoiding getting married to someone of the same sex.

Thanks. This one is particularly pleasant:

"SIR – Would a fish be a chicken because Cameron's Government said so? Could a man marry his horse? However they dress it in the guise of "equality", the fact (even after today's vote) is that only a man and a woman can become one in marriage – the Creator designed it so."

Tossbag.

The argument that keeps cropping up is that same-sex marraige in some way degrades or reduces the importance of heterosexual marriage.
I just don't get that, can someone explain it for me?

Yes, you see you're reading the actual words, not what the person actually means, when you see the phrase "same-sex marraige degrades heterosexual marriage" what the person actually [imeans[/i is "I'm a homophobic biggot, but I am a 'christian', so I'll hide behind my religion instead of just being honest"

I must confess, that is what I got from it.
I'm just wondering where the logic in their argument lies ... if there is any.

did you really just use the word "logic" in a thread that is, ostensibly, about religion?

silly boy!

I'm looking forward to Peter Bone's contribution, especially after thisThere is "no mandate in any political party, not in any manifesto" for gay marriage said Tory MP Peter Bone, who said marriage should be between a man and a woman[/i

There was no mandate for decimating the NHS or for demonising the disabled and most vulnerable in society. If there had been the fooking tories wouldn't have got within a cat's cock-hair of power

Where is Kirkstaller ?

Standing outside the Commons with his 'God Hates Fags' placard.

Probably took his kids with him for a day out.

Bang to rights guv.
Should have known.