• It’s Time for a Vote

    This week we get to a significant point in the campaign for more equal marriage law in Scotland. On Wednesday there will be a vote in the parliament at Holyrood. Whilst there has been a lot of pre-scrutiny of the legislation and a long political process already, this is the first time that members of parliament get to vote on the legislation.

    At the moment, it looks as though there will be a commanding victory for those who want to see change. However, nothing should ever be presumed and people are still contacting their Members of Parliament to urge them to be supportive on Wednesday.

    Interestingly, the vote itself is indicative of residual prejudice. It is still apparently acceptable to political parties to have their members being seen to deny the rights of gay people. They are having a free vote – that means there will be no political consequences to anyone voting against party policy on this matter.

    Several analogies are helpful here – mixed race marriage, suicide/euthanasia, capital punishment and abortion. You see, if anyone was foolish enough to force a vote on whether black people could get married to white people then the parties would make it a whipped vote. (And let us not be silly enough to believe that such discrimination is a fantasy – I’ve members of my congregation who have lived under racist legislation concerning relationships). Should there ever be a vote to restrict the right of a mixed-race couple to marry then political parties would be queuing up firstly to condemn the idea of a vote in the first place and then to ensure that every one of their members voted the right way. There would be no question of a free vote or it being a “conscience issue”. When it comes to the gays, it is suddenly different.

    Looking the other way, consider the votes that are traditionally free votes – they tend to be things like whether to allow euthenasia, whether to bring back hanging and what laws should apply to abortion. Making the votes on whether to allow same-sex couples to get hitched free (ie unwhipped) votes lumps this issue right in with those issues.

    Now, straight friends, let me ask you. How would you feel if your own relationship (or potential for relationship) was regarded by parliamentary parties as being akin to euthenasia, hanging and the termination of a pregnancy? If you think it is unreasonable for your gay friends to be treated likewise then there are several things you can do. Firstly, if you are in Scotland then get in touch with your MSPs before Wednesday and urge them to support the proposed changes. (It just takes 2 minutes – see here). Remember, the political parties won’t be doing this – there’s just you to remind them. Secondly, look out for the news and keep up with when the next stages of this voting procedure are. Chances are we are looking at a final vote in the early stages of the new year. Thirdly tell others why you are supportive of this change. Fourthly, if you are a blogger, share your views as to why it’s time for change and pass the video below along. For another persective from St Mary’s on why it’s time, check out Beth’s blog.

    And fifthly, take a look at this video one more time and enjoy the positive, joyful campaigning that has been characteristic of this struggle. There’s folk in it that you know. Trust me…

9 responses to “Scotland Says No!”

  1. Tim Avatar

    Hallelujah!!

  2. Susan Sheppard Hedges Avatar
    Susan Sheppard Hedges

    Yes!!!

  3. Martin Reynolds Avatar

    “something that the church overwhelmingly felt was not the way forward”

    …… the way set by the emergency Primates meeting way back when Gene had just been elected was not the way forward and, sad to say, I can’t think of any good that has flowed from it.

    I can only hope that the threats are now over and the listening begins.

  4. Neil Oliver Avatar
    Neil Oliver

    Excellent news.

  5. Zebadee Avatar
    Zebadee

    This has to be good news for the Anglican Communion it’self.

  6. Brother David Avatar
    Brother David

    TBTG!

  7. Brother David Avatar
    Brother David

    BTW, Father Mark Harris in the US says that the Philippine province has already said no to the covenant.

  8. Kelvin Holdsworth Avatar

    Yes – it is reported that the Philippine province has said no, but the reports I saw suggested that it was their bishops who said no rather than a vote in a General Synod.

    My point was that I think that the Scottish Synod is the first actual Synod of a Province to say no. Happy to be proved wrong though.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Sermon – 17 June 2007 – The woman with the perfume

    When I was first in full time ministry, as a lay person, some fifteen years ago, I worked as a member of the chaplaincy team, in the University of London. The team that I worked in was a team of five people, four ordained, and me, a lay person. Four were men, and one a…

  • Ahh, arrhh, arrrrhhhhh chooo!

    I’m off work for a couple of days. I’ve picked up a sneezing lurgy. If I had company, I’m sure it would be a man-cold. However, as it is, I’m on my own, so it is merely an indisposition. Normal service will be resumed shortly.

  • Music in the Cathedral

    In addition to matters liturgical, I’ve been at two concerts over the last couple of days. One of contemporary music and another by a brilliant new jazz ensemble. Both of these were taking place in St Mary’s as elements of the West End Festival. It is wonderful to see the building open and in use…

  • Feast of the Son of Encouragement

    Wait a minute, I need a maniple. What? I need a maniple, if I am going to celebrate this morning. No you don’t. You might want a maniple, but you don’t really think you need one do you? What!? No maniple, no mass! Anyway, I’m not sure it should be called a maniple. What about…