The SNP, equal marriage and a large dose of red herring

Equality campaigners across Scotland were quietly confident on Tuesday. It had been widely expected that the SNP Government would at least allow equality in civil marriage if not religious. After all, the measure had already secured the support of a majority of MSPs and the Equality and Human Rights Commission report suggest sthat it has the support of over 60% of Scots. The Government’s plans have, however, attracted vocal opposition from some religious organisations.

However, the Government announced that it was delaying the decision and setting up a Cabinet Committee to “further examine some particular issues of detail”. A final decision would be made by the end of this month. I wrote then that there were some crumbs of comfort to be taken, most notably that Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, who has expressed her personal support for equal marriage, was in charge of this committee.

The BBC reported yesterday, though, that a leaked email from a civil servant suggested that legislation would not be forthcoming unless the UK wide Equality Act of 2010 was amended.

 We would not introduce a bill into the Scottish Parliament until we had reached agreement with the UK government on the types of amendment that might be needed to the Equality Act 2010

Apparently they want to give protect the rights of free speech to opponents of equal marriage and ensure no action could be taken against celebrants who refuse to marry same sex couples.

Cardinal Keith O’Brien has variously called same sex marriage similar to legalising slavery, promising an “unprecedented backlash” if the Government allows it. He’s called it a grotesque subversion and said that:

The empirical evidence is clear, same-sex relationships are demonstrably harmful to the medical, emotional and spiritual wellbeing of those involved, no compassionate society should ever enact legislation to facilitate or promote such relationships, we have failed those who struggle with same-sex attraction.

The fact that he has been able to make these robust and, let’s be honest, offensive, comments without legal consequence amply demonstrates that the law on free speech gives opponents all the protection they need.

In terms of the protection of celebrants, Schedule 23 of the Equality Act 2010 outlines when it’s possible for religious organisations to discriminate against LGBT people including.

The organisation does not contravene Part 3, 4 or 7, so far as relating to religion or belief or sexual orientation, only by restricting—

(a) membership of the organisation;

(b) participation in activities undertaken by the organisation or on its behalf or under its auspices;

Marriage rites clearly come under sub paragraph (b). LGBT people are routinely refused full membership of churches but no legal action has ever been taken.  This shows that the Equality Act issue is a large dose of red herring.

Why, though, would the SNP raise it? Well, any discussion and subsequent amendment to the Equality Act could delay legislation beyond the referendum on independence. The former leader of the SNP Gordon Wilson last year expressed the view that allowing equal marriage could alienate  people considering voting for independence. One of the SNP’s major donors, bus tycoon Brian Souter, funded the campaign against the repeal of Clause 2A (the Scottish version of Clause 28).  It’s understandable that some people might feel that bringing the Equality Act into play has a strong whiff of expediency about it.

Scottish Liberal Democrat Leader Willie Rennie said that politics must not get in the way of delivering equal marriage:

I want an assurance that the Scottish Government’s demands on the Equality Act are not them putting up a straw man to appease opponents of equal marriage.  I share the view that no-one should be forced to conduct same-sex marriages.

But if changes to the Equality Act are shown to be unnecessary I hope the Scottish Government will accept that fact, and move quickly to deliver equal marriage.  Politics must not get in the way of equality for people in Scotland.

I really hope that the Government will put its energies into delivering full equality. If they do so, they will have cross party support. They will not have to face the vocal minority of opponents alone.

* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings

Read more by or more about , , , , , or .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.


  • Yet more proof that the Scottish Government will blame absolutely anything on Westminster.

  • Caron Lindsay Caron Lindsay 19th Jul '12 - 2:19pm

    It certainly is in character but a bit odd especially when they don’t seem to consider Westminster laws as particularly important on things like delivering a legal and fair ndependence referendum. It’s only a few weeks since Salmond was apparently threatening to hold his own referendum on the day of the UK General Election if the terms of the Section 30 Order giving them the power couldn’t be agreed with Westminster. On this, they say they can’t change the law in Scotland because of that nasty Westminster. The fact that it’s on an issue which would annoy their supporters and the Church is, of course, a complete coincidence.

  • Caron Lindsay Caron Lindsay 19th Jul '12 - 2:48pm

    Good point, Dave. We were discussing this at Glasgow Pride on Saturday and Alex has got this off the ground very quickly:-).

  • Mike Falchikov 19th Jul '12 - 5:13pm

    I think the Equality argument is a red herring. There is obviously freedom for religious organisations to act according to their doctrine in matters spiritual, but on purely common sense grounds why would any couple, gay or straight, seek to
    force someone to marry them, if that individual clearly disliked them or disapproved of their choice of lifestyle.

  • The obvious point is though, that this party had 8 years in government in Scotland and never raised the matter once. It is dragging its heels over the issue in England. We are in no position to hurl stones when we are standing in the greenhouse!

    Instead of adopting this rather self-defeating opportunistic oppositionist stance, we should be working with the more liberal parts of the SNP and other Scottish parties to build a majority in both the Westminster and Scottish parliaments to help both governments pass this legislation.

    It really is hypocritical to, on one hand oppose the independence referendum on the grounds that it is open to legal challenge without Westminster’s agreement, and then criticise the Scottish Government on another issue for seeking Westminster’s agreement to avoid the possibility of a legal challenge!

  • Kevin Donnelly 25th Jul '12 - 12:31pm

    Red-faces replace red-herrings among the anti-SNP, anti-indy cyber community today.
    Hopefully today’s announcement well serve, yet again, to remind to all those engaged in smearing the SNP Government on any issue how silly they look.
    The hype surrounding the alleged early announcement was totally manufactured by the media (and presumably the usual suspects). The SNP has shown again that it will stick to its own timescale, its own agenda and will do so with integrity and without the name-calling, lies and smears that define so much of Unionist negativity.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?


Recent Comments

  • User AvatarPaul Walter 8th Dec - 9:10am
    At first, I thought perhaps we were focussing too widely but I put in a few postcodes across the country (you just look up the...
  • User AvatarPeter Martin 8th Dec - 7:56am
    "The UK government ran quite large deficits in the 2000’s much of it kept off the books in the form of PFI contracts and student...
  • User AvatarPeter Martin 8th Dec - 7:55am
    "....... taking money from people within society (non-voluntarily for taxes) creating winners and losers. That is not an “illusion” and to insist otherwise is counterproductive."...
  • User AvatarThomas 8th Dec - 2:39am
    Matthew Huntbach - "On tuition fees, the issue is that we could not have got the Tories to agree to the tax rises that would...
  • User AvatarDavid Evershed 8th Dec - 2:29am
    The purpose of NATO is as a mutual defence structure. An attack on any one NATO country requires its defence by all the NATO countries....
  • User AvatarJoseph Bourke 8th Dec - 2:06am
    Peter, Public assets and liabilities are ultimately collective assets and liabilities of private sector households represented by currency deposits and government bonds in circulation, just...
Tue 10th Dec 2019