I like Iain Dale, but I’m afraid he has got it wrong this time and at the same time has exposed one of the problems of blogging.
In his open letter to me and Chris Bryant MP, he bases his assertions on a BBC article which focused on one or two things that Chris and I said – from a two hour debate, at which I don’t think Iain was present.
In fact the Pride Political Debate, held to launch Pride celebrations in London, was a good-natured affair in which Chris and I debated with the Conservatives Nick Boles and Nick Herbert MP, and with Stephen Williams MP of the Liberal Democrats.
In Iain’s open letter, he comments that "We should try to find common cause rather than constantly to seek cheap political advantage". I understand why the Tories would want to remove the politics from the debate, since their politics have not exactly measured up to the equality agenda recently or in the further past. As a Labour Minister I am proud to explain and communicate Labour’s policies and to show that Labour has a strong track record of achievement in ending discrimination.
During the debate, I recognised and welcomed moves from some Conservative Party members such as John Bercow to drag their party into the 21st Century and sign up to the equalities agenda, but warm words from some of the more progressive Tories can’t hide the poor record of many Conservative MPs and activists.
I also welcomed David Cameron’s recent change of language on equality and expressed a hope that the day will come soon when we do not have to debate this at all.
In turn, Nick Boles and Nick Herbert MP made staunch defences of their party, acknowledged their mistakes and talked about their advances, and were very gracious in their praise for what the Labour Government has achieved.
However, I commented that "there is still a deep strain of homophobia that still exists on the Tory benches". I do believe that many Tory backbenchers remain unreconstructed, as even a cursory glance at their voting and Hansard records will confirm.
The Tory reaction to the debate, seeking to shout loudly in order to stifle discussion about their current stance on equality and gay rights, shows they still aren’t in the right place on this and have missed the point yet again.
David Cameron has apologised for his support of Section 28, but the argument has moved on.
Why are the Conservatives rejecting important equality legislation for LGBT people in the shape of the Equality Bill?
Why did Cameron and his frontbenchers oppose fertility rights for lesbians?
Why are they, right now, opposing laws to prevent incitement to homophobic hatred?
And why are they forming alliances with far-right, nasty homophobic parties in Europe and why aren’t gay Tories like Iain speaking out about this?
Despite some Tories’ slightly hysterical reaction, they cannot deny that over the years and even up to the present day they have voted against nearly all of the equality legislation that this Labour Government has introduced. Although the mood music has changed from Cameron, I’m afraid I remain to be convinced that the Tory backbenches have really changed.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
StumbleUpon
I don't want my taxes to pay for an unelected monarchy, or the nationalised Church of England, or faith schools. And yet I have no choice about the matter. Neither do you.
The Tory client state consists of people like you who respond to their dog-whistle politics like little lap-dogs. Tories are deference-loving lickspittles who are generally bitter and nasty about their own life failings. By preventing freedom from spreading, and by keeping people in their place, Tories appeal to people like you and wreck the country in the process.
Just over 20% of the electorate voted Labour in at the last election. I wonder how Labour would have done had we removed all people on benefits from the electoral roll? Or maybe if we removed everyone educated to below A level standard?
"Progressive taxation" is theft on the part of socialists from the middle classes to spend on your core vote.
You can dress it up anyway you like but it involves you taking money from people who don't support you to give to those who do.
In any other form that's theft.
So, I don't want to pay for gay rights, IVF for lesbians, remedial classes for kids whose parents can't be bothered with education or the EU budget to promote such nonsense as the social chapter etc. etc.
Your way around that is to get those people who benefit from all that to vote Labour so you can steal through the taxation system.
The Labour government has done nothing of worth for me and sees the middle classes as just a nice target.
I suggest you take your "progressive taxation" and go apply it to your core vote as I don't want to pay you a single penny.
Yep, good one Guy. Well thought out as usual.
Only an idiot would think all ideas are equally as good as one another, and only a prize turnip would consider conservatism as one of the better of those ideas. Especially given the way if has destroyed the fabric of the nation time and time again.
Can we put up these words in big letters at the front of the conference hall, this October?
I couldn't think of a better way to 'rally the troops'.
And clearly your daughter is an untelligent as you are if she thinks it's sensible to be against somebody on the basis of sexual orientation rather than merit, or any criteria based on logic.
Still, for all we know, your daughter doesn't think this and you may well be making this up.
Let's hope the legislation on making sex education compulsory gets speeded up quickly.
But regardless of this, your kids will learn about homosexuality and gay rights through multiple different sources. You don't just need school to teach it.
Plus, I imagine your kids will get ridiculed if you pull them out of sex education classes. Imagine when the other kids ask your children why they had to leave the room and they say 'well it's because my dad won't let me be taught about homosexuality' lol! I imagine the other kids will be more than happy to fill in the details they might have missed.
You mention tory voting records and suggest conclusions on the individual MPs opinions/attitudes.
Can you tell me if MPs only concern when voting is their own opinion/attitude?
Can you assure me that MPs entirely disregard all other influences (i.e. they entirely ignore the views of their constituents? they entirely ignore any party line (including whips)?).
If not - are you prepared to admit that your article is just dishonest, pointless, party political drivel meant to mislead readers. And of course apologise for it...
Nothing they say or do will convince you, even if they were to say that the sun rises every morning.
No doubt you won't respond to any posts here as you didn't to your last hotch-potch contribution.
PS hair still looking good.
Pure Animal Farm. Brilliant.
No they might be taught what your sort believe is right and proper, which isn't right and proper. Fortunately my kids grammar school know the uproar they will get if they promote homosexuality so the "teaching" will be brief and lightweight.
You are clearly gay, I'm not and I'll ensure my kids get taught morals by me and not by your sort.
You really have trouble accepting the fact that a lot of the middle classes despise your sort don't you?
Nope, people like you are lowest on the pecking order as you support theft on a national scale through the taxation system.
Why not just wander in to a few houses and steal the money directly? At least then it would be a more honest approach.
Funny though how your like thinks you have the moral high ground when your entire political philosophy is based upon theft. Or to put it more bluntly I don't want to pay a penny of income tax to support you or your policies, so the only way you can do it is to steal from me. You are nothing but a cheap political thief.
Even if there are 4 milliom gays in the UK (and I don't believe there are) most don't tribalise themselves as "gay".
As I said before anyway, I'd far rather associate myself with the rural population as a cause than the "gay" movement. Pretty much everyone I know I suspect has the same view. So as long as the "gay" movement keeps out of my life and doesn't expect to use my taxes for anything "gay" then it can do what the hell it likes.
Also, the teaching of sex education is due to be compulsory (and rightly so). It makes about as much sense withdrawing students from sex education lessons as it does removing them from a maths lesson or a physics lesson. So actually I think you'll find your kids will be taught what is right and proper, rather than your false, bigoted view of the world. And there's nothing you can do about it.
Fertility treatment for lesbian couples already happens. that includes in your nice, middle class area too. You are just not aware of it...
And as already said, its much more about ensuring that existing legislation is implemented. I hardly think any future Tory government is going to waste time reversing stuff which is largely uncontroversial and would do nothing to win them any extra votes.
Maybe you might want to take this up with the communities cabinet member on our local authority - a Tory PPC, firmly supportive of gay and lesbian equality
However, I have said that it shouldn't be for parents to deny their children a good quality education. Parents should be no more entitled to withdraw their child from sex education classes as they should from a mathematics class or a physics class. In fact I believe legislation which broadly follows that argument has either recently been introduced, or is about to be.
I also think you're being very optimistic in terms of thinking what a Tory government would repeal. Cameron's scared stiff of being painted as the nasty party.
And, as I have already said before (but obviously you chose not to read it), I'm not the greatest fan of positive discrimination, however sometimes it does have a temporary place in society to correct the effects of discrimination in the past.
When you say "working class areas voted for the BNP", what you're talking about is roughly 10%-15% at most in those areas voting for them (usually a lot less). And most of those people will be voting for them because they're annoyed with Labour, not because they are signed up to the BNP's fascist policies.
There are a quite a few gay men who hunt, by the way. Being gay isn't exclusively urban!
In Unity
MA
Reading Bills comments on the other blog, it was agreed that about 4 million people in the UK are LGBT. So I suppose hunting really could be said to be a minority cause movement.
In Unity
MA
In regards to the laughable "equality" laws Harman is trying to push through, even labour ministers can see what a truely bad idea they are. Shes trying to widen any existing divides for political purposes.
Whether they hunted or not seemed largely irrelevant to the anger it caused.
I argued that working class areas don't care one way or another about and are therefore ambivalent about gay rights:
"See it as an issue for the white working class core Labour vote?"
Perhaps you could post where I write that "working class areas were against gay rights"?
You are a socialist, I'm a Tory that gives me the moral high ground over you whether you like it or not.
I certainly do take the moral high around over you, by the way.
The oly thing my eldest feels sorry about is havng to deal with the economic mess you socialists have left her.
As for her "thing I feel passionate about" talk at school she chose why she "passionately hates Labour".
Good on her, she'll go far.
No there's nothing about socialism that I think makes sense
Yes collective action is needed on climate change and yes there will be wars about energy and water.
I would not count your chickens just yet with regard to Labour getting back in, remember John Major!
Anyway have you always disliked socialism?
Is there any ideals or parts of socialism that you do think, well yes that does make sense?
I do think that a big issue like the environmental issues that the whole world face will need total collective action, both from the left and the right. I do think that te future and some might say current wars are to be about energy and water. What do you think?
In Unity
MA
So don't take the moral high ground over equality and freedom etc. whilst you support a party enacting racist sexist legislation.
Anyway in terms of polls, te majority of the country think Brown and Labour are useless and should call an election. I don't see that happening at the moment?
As for the "hammering", I'm posting on a (supposedly) Labour blog site as a staunch Tory. I dislike all socialists and what they stand for and make it very clear. Did you think I was going to get warm words? Do you think this site is representative of the public's views?
I'm actually not angry at all, I would be if I thought Labour would win another term on the backs of voters wanting them to steal a bit more money from the middle classes.
I'm from the North and I'm from a working class family, not from some middle-class Islington liberal set-up, and yet astonishingly I support equality for all under the law, am socially liberal and am a secularist. Crazy, huh?
Many people in this country won't particularly care about gay rights simply because they'll have no direct impact on their own lives, but similarly a big majority in this country don't get worked up against gay rights either and accept it's important to have equality under the law. You on the other hand, seem to have some sort of irrational fear of equality and a free society.
Tory Toff,
I thought it was wrong to call people names.
You are getting a bit of a hammering over the last few days!
You really are angry at the moment.
Anyway found this mori poll and will look to get more stats later:
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=152.
Take it easy. Have a good weekend.
In Unity
MA
an oxymoron to treasure
See it as an issue that touches middle England?
See it as an issue for the white working class core Labour vote?
See it as anything other than a fixation with right on PC metrosexual islingtonistas of the Labour party?
Minority group, minority issue, minority importance - happy to ignore.
No response on how discrimination against middle class univerity applicants is "equality"
No response on how discrimination against private health care patients is "equality"?
Fortunately your views are on the way out along with your government and we can wave bye bye to a load of your "equality" laws as well.
I want no attention at all thanks, what I want is people like you out of government asap. Not long to wait now.
By the way my kids aren't taught that homosexuality is "equal" either at school or at home. Absolutely nothing you can do about that is there?
Their will be no "fertility treatment" for Lesbians, the Tory party is against it as are Labour.
The Tory party will happily stay in its current EU grouping, no change their then.
The incoming Tory government will not restrict free speech and further and in fact I expect them to relax the authoritarian position Labour have adopted.
The gay vote is just a tiny minority vote that according to opinions polls will largely vote Tory at the next election anyway (38%). Cameron will say the right things on the very few occasions he has any need to say anything at all and that will be that.
The notion that professional middle class electors who happen to also be gay will vote primarily on "gay" issues is ludicrous. They will vote as will everyone else on economy, jobs, education etc.
Minority group, minority issue, minority importance.
As for my views, I check with my kids on what they get taught in their sex-ed classes at their grammar school. First sign of homosexuality being taught as equal to heterosexuality and they get pulled from the classes and a complaint made. Funnily enough being in a nice middle class area they don't get taught anything like it. But then the school knows the parents would be up in arms.
So thanks, but in my nice quiet middle class world you and your pro gay policies don't even get close to us.
If you don't believe in equality, then you don't believe in Labour.
Your view that people in the North are not metropolitan or liberal is out-dated and simply wrong. The North is generally more cosmopolitan than the South given the high amounts of urban areas there are. I'm a Northerner through and through and never seen a problem with equality issues.
Because it certainly isn't the North of England, where I'm from. In fact, Sheffield seems to be a highly progressive, cosmopolitan city, like most of the urban North. I find the North to be far more liberal and progressive than the South.
You seem to talk about the North as the land of flat caps and whippets. It's a world that only exists in your own mind.
I want all taxpayers to be treated equally, as they have every right to.
I think Guy, you're a bit of an attention seeker aren't you.
But if it was because of party whipping, then that would be even worse, suggesting the culture of homophobia spreads right across the party.
More importantly show me a poll of the rural population in favour of a ban?
Personally I find hunting a bit barbaric but then I don't keep livestock etc.
Also please look up how many people the countryside alliance got to turn up to their march in central London? More people turned up for that than PRIDE.
Further a far greater proportion of the country live in rural areas than are gay.
But as you say it's all about which group you fel inclined to support. I personally feel far more sympathetic to the rural pro hunting lobby than the gay lobby.
It would appear that you think that Mr. Cameron produces 'nothing but personal insults'. Presumably you think these 'personal insults' are directed at our Prime Minister.
I would therefore like to point out that you are partially right, in that Mr. Cameron is attempting to portray Mr. Brown as a dishonest person, and is that Mr. Brown is 'taking the public for fools' in his words, regarding public spending mainly, but on other issues also.
I would go one further. Mr. Brown, our Great Leader, is in my humble opinion telling us 'untruths' (to be very polite) about future spending plans. It seems to me that he thinks that Labours core vote are so thick that they will believe his nonsense.
I know of no serious people who actually understand fiscal policy and who think that Mr. Brown is being honest.
According to the IFS's interpretation of Labours own 2009 April budget, real departmental spending is coming down by 7%. The Tories have pledged to defend both the Health and International Development budgets. In doing so, that means all the other departments must suffer between them a 10% cut, the actual distribution of this 10% is not yet determined. It is the distribution of this 10% cut that should be the subject of discussion by adults (that is if both Labour and Tories pledge to protect Health and IA of course).
Incidentally, Mr. Balls wants the education budget to be ring fenced also (Mr. Lansley got himself in a right tangle on this very subject, which is what kicked off this whole debate). But in doing so, and in doing the same for Health and International Development, the remaining departments must then incur a 13% reduction in real terms spending (using Labours figures).
The IFS covers all of this in great detail, and uses Labours own figures from the budget.
Now, Mr. Brown has chosen to attack Mr. Cameron as 'Mr. 10%', and explicitly stated that there will be no such cuts under Labour.
Mr. Cameron responds that the Prime Minister is 'taking the public for fools', i.e.suggesting that Mr. Brown is liar, and you take issue with this? I really cannot see why.
This is only touching one subject, there are many others where I take issue with Mr. Brown. Our economy was in an appalling state going in to this recession, with a bubble in both credit, housing and banking (all related) all contributing to whopping government coffers, and all illusory in being nothing more than inflation in assets due to the monstrous inflation of the money supply. We can then couple this with an almost anti-Keynesian fiscal deficit AT THE TOP of the economic cycle. This was bleedin' obvious years ago (so some at least), and was criminal, but hardly anyone wanted to listen.
Fraser Nelson describes, quite reasonably in my opinion, just what a mess we are in:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/3729558/in-browns-debt.thtml
That is enough of that for now :-) Elizabeth, would you please tell me when you last chatted to "The leaders of the rest of the world" about Mr. Cameron please?
Rad your comments on the environment blog the other day, I do think that far to many people have their heads in the sand when it comes to the environment issues. The OU do some good stuff on the environment. Do you think we are heading towards another Ice age or is it something else?
Anyway the hunting issue does not cover the whole rural community, so to say that it does is untrue. Hunting is something that belongs in the past, and is one of the last feudal means of employment left. Greater number are against it than for it. I have lived in a rural area and I never saw the population go to the hunt.
Hunting is a minority pressure group who have money and influence behind them and the Tory party are part of that. Saying that the Tory party will be part of anything that could win a vote.
I do think that the LGBT community is greater in number than the hunting community and their course is far more just.
In Unity
MA
Incidentally, the Tory front bench objection to the equality Bill has nothing to do with gay issues, but largely fiscal matters concerning women's equality
And remember that the bulk of the necessary legal changes have already been achieved. If you seriously think that the Tories will reverse these, then I think its you who isn't reading the mood-music.
Interested in your idea of a full post, but I would need a few days (week or so is probably more likely - work's busy!) to work up and edit something I felt proud of. Also, my point would be more to do with the need to reconnect with the real core, rather than the LGBT angle - I don't probably have enough to say about LGBT apart from I don't think that's the main national issue, and that over-celebration may harm the overall message we should want to convey.
Thanks
Jaime
Please also link evidence for anyone of sound mind thinking the leader of the Tory party is a "bolshie"?
How does making it legitimate to desciminate agasint a white male in job interviews treating people "equally"?
How is social engineering on university places so admissions procedures can discriminate middle class kids treating people "equally"?
How is promoting government spending on "Lesbian fertility treatment" when the government in question tried to maintina a policy of removing cancer treatment to patients with private health care treating people "equally"?
Whenever I see some socialist spouting eulogies to "equality" I get this vision of Animal Farm. Sure socialists want "equality", but only so long as their supporters are more equal than others.
As for Section 28, I didn't want my taxes (national and local ) being spent by people like Red Ken promoting homosexuality in schools etc. I still don't by the way.
As Jamie T suggests, Labour has become a party of ideas that are "metropolitan, southern, socially liberal". I'd actually say it's far more leftward leaning that that and now does represent a metrosexual islington trendy media set that not only bears little relation to its core vote but little relation to Londoners in the suburbs, hence the mass turn out of tory vote in the outer london boroughs to vote in Boris.
The rural population would be pretty affended to be lumped in with the gay community in size and impact.
Having come from a strongly working class Labour city (Sheffield) but now living in London, I have to say it really is like another country down here. The way of life just doesn't compare. There is a huge tendency amongst Metropolitan types, most of whome rarely venture to the North, to think that the rest of the country is just like them. It isn't.
On the specific issue of Gay rights, it just isn't on the radar screen in most of the North, or,for that matter, most of the rest of the country. Generally there is very little homosexual culture, perhaps because so many gay people used to move to London.
The vast majority of people are, quite frankly, sick of hearing about the subject. Celebrate your Pride march it you wish by all means, but don't make the mistake that many north of the M25 are listening.
I come from a working class background and I believe that in parts of that culture there is a need to be seen as masculine (like is South America, Castro said the same in a interview) in all aspects of life, sexually, emotionally etc. I know that any break in the masculine armour will be used against you. It is not a way that I agree with, but it is an environment I came from.
I think one of the biggest changes in this attitude that I saw was due to the early Rave scene. This to me was like a revolution, it stuck two fingers up to the then Tory government and changed the way a lot of young people saw and interacted with each other. Before this you would drink loads of booze and have a scrap. When you went to a Rave, things were friendly, people mixed and yes, there were drugs.
I do think that there is an issue culturally with homosexuality in parts of our culture, if there is a problem at the working class end and at the upper class, then a middle ground has to be found, and the fight taken forward. It is a thousand times better now and there is still more to do.
The Labour Party have done good work here, could still be improved upon.
I am of the believe, as I said above, that the question is all about LOVE between two humans, and that is something that is special, and one day society will see it that way two. I am glad to live in a country were this can happen.
In Unity
MA
You can only assume that he simply offers such opinions to provoke a reaction of sorts.
The simple fact of the matter is that you just don't get it. Of course the gay rights agenda in itself is not the most crucial issue in the world; but what you don't seem to grasp is that this is part of a wider struggle for all people to be treated equally and with respect and with the equal protection of the law.
I have never really understood why people have such a problem with anybody who LOVES another person. It all boils down to LOVE, and when you have it, it is great. Sure there is raw sex, and that can be great too. LOVE is what people really want and who has the right to say that it is wrong, no matter in which form it is in.
Life is precious and a happy life is what everybody wants.
Labour has done a good job here, and we should take pride in that.
I do think that the Tory turnaround is interesting and yet I just don’t believe them. I do think that they are the same party they where and always have been. Just look at the issue with Lord Ashcroft, and Guy you talk about more important issues than that of single issue minority pressure groups, well my friend what about the intension to repeal the hunting bill (favours for friends, old skool politics at its best).
I still can’t really tell the difference between David Cameron & Nick Clegg when I listen on the radio. Am I the only one?
Anyway keep up the fight.
In Unity
MA
We've done a few of these guest editorhsips before and they open the debate to those who don't often get to speak - that is one of the things Labour's all about. Others are listed here: http://www.labourlist.org/celebrating_gay_pride_with_lgbt_labour
That said, your point is understood. Would you like to expand it and post this as a full post on LabourList?
As for "arrogant bolshie, that would describe Brown perfectly.
Adjective
1. difficult to manage; rebellious
2. politically radical or left-wing
Noun
pl -shies
any political radical [from Bolshevik]
I've been reading LL for a few months (only registered to comment about a month ago) and do understand that my comments are mostly to do with the utter disaster that is Gordon Brown. However, in this case, I'm commenting because the last ten articles on LL are about the London Pride march and the LGBT debate. I don't recall 10 articles in succession being on any one topic, so I assume this topic must be particularly important to LL, and that's what worries me.
My position? I'm certainly left leaning, probably more socialist than New Labour, and come from a South American culture that really doesn't acknowledge homosexuality from any part of the class spectrum. That's probably our loss, although to me (and I keep my opinions private) I cannot escape a feeling that it is unnatural. I'm sorry, but that's what I deeply think.
To my comment, in support of the Labour movement. I note that those posting either articles or comments seem to come from the metropolitan, southern, socially liberal point of view. If Labour is really to re-connect with a core, working class, mostly midland and northern support base, has either LL or the party itself thought to ask what core supporters think about homosexuality? I do suspect that many would be far less liberal or openly supportive of homosexuality than 10 consecutive pro-LGBT articles would suggest. From another perspective, ask why the BNP is doing so well among traditional working class ex-Labour supporters, and ask if this is connected with what I perceive to be a liberal metropolitan PC over-dominance in the modern Labour party?
Has it? I still think Section 28 was dead right.
"Why are the Conservatives rejecting important equality legislation for LGBT people in the shape of the Equality Bill?"
Because it's a racist and sexist piece of legislation that will be removed from Law as soon as the Tory party win the next election
"Why did Cameron and his frontbenchers oppose fertility rights for lesbians?"
Because it's wrong and I don't want to be paying my taxes to help Lesbians to have children. The rights of a child to a normal balanced male/female parent set over rides the rights of Lesbians.
Further and most importantly, with limited resources the NHS has far far more better uses for resources than Lesbian fertility treatment.
"Why are they, right now, opposing laws to prevent incitement to homophobic hatred?"
Because unlike this authoritarian government the Tory party have never believed in the sort of restrictions on free speech you seem to
"And why are they forming alliances with far-right, nasty homophobic parties in Europe and why aren’t gay Tories like Iain speaking out about this?"
Because the other parties are also anti federalists and sorry to bring the light of reality to your door, but the future of the EU is of more importance than whether gays like the political groupings in EU.
The gay movement is a minority single issue pressure group that is way way down the list of important issues. THe public don't take you that seriously and politicians pay lip service. Next week you won't even be remembered.
"Even after the expenses scandal, they just don’t get it".
As someone who 'flipped' their 'main' house and as a minister of the only party whose members are under investigation for fraud you claim the tories are 'homophobic' can you explain how the labour party aren't in fact thieves and criminals ?
Or can you explain how the labour 'get it' ?
...and the BBCs disgraceful reporting is what? If what Ben says is correct they have caused all the hoohah by baltantly picking the very worst possible headline with very little to assuage it in their article.
P.S. You're wrong about Cameron.
Cameron apologising for sect.28 is nothing more than a political move for votes---
Are the Cornerstone Group planning to make regular trips to Brighton? Has Anne Widdecombe 'embraced' lesbians in her constituency? I think we should be told.
Just a quick glance at voting records would tell you that.
I'd rather, though, take issue with the completely unsupported idea that Iain's open letter "has exposed one of the problems with blogging". Nonsense. The problem was that a two-hour debate was cut down to a couple of soundbites by a BBC journalist.
The problem is the Old Media focus on soundbites, and reducing politics down to the smallest and simplest catchphrase because of the high cost of distribution (be it newspaper inches or broadcast time). What the blogosphere does is allows Iain and Ben to have a more sensible conversation about what was really said, and for them to have it in public where we can all read it.
I appreciate that several of Mr Bradshaw's colleagues have been burned by their encounters with the blogosphere (in my view, they often deserved it), but I don't think the reaction of everything that comes from teh interweb should be prefaced by "this shows the problem with blogging". It's reactionary, it's mindless, and in case anyone cares it's not even true.
Without blogging, Iain's letter would have been in a national newspaper tomorrow, and Mr Bradshaw's response in a similar paper sometime on Monday - when nobody cared any more. If Labour Cabinet ministers could start appreciating the medium, rather than judging it by the politics of those who were first dominant in using it, the Labour movement online would be very, very grateful.
I am a Labour supporter. However, from the point of lesbian, gay, bisexual and TG people, it is just as important to have the leaderships of all three main parties (four in Scotland) to be openly supportive of LGBT equality as it is to have the equality laws passed in the first place. What was given can be taken away, but is much more secure where for all parties this has become a moot issue. On this, I give Cameron high points, although it is (as Ben Bradshaw argues) equally clear that many Tory supporters are hesitant.
As Peter Tatchell argued in today's Guardian, the argument has moved on. I am willing to give the public time to adjust to the idea of "gay marriage", but I do think, immediately, the current prohibition on religious settings for civil partnerships should be lifted. There are a number of religious groups ( Unitarians, Liberal Jews, the Metropolitan Community Church, perhaps the Episcopal Church in Scotland, certainly many Independent/Old Catholic churches) who are willing to marry LGBT people in religious ceremonies.
I do realise this next election will be tough, but there are at least two options worth raising (especially in light of the willingness of many LGBT people to vote Tory):
1. Simply to state in the Manifesto that since 2005 the whole western world world has moved on. Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, and a number of other countries now have equal civil marriage. Labour needs to state that the UK will enact similar laws wrt civil marriage (without compelling religious organisations that don't want to). See if Cameron will match that.
2. Faut de mieux. State that religious groups that want to can celebrate gay marriages as civil partnerships. This is specifically prohibited by current law.
Money first, everything else later.
Because they're Tory first and gay afterwards?