FT Weekend: Those Pesky Gays

"My marriage is under threat; its very existence is being undermined. I know this because the Catholic Church says so. I’m not Catholic myself, you understand, but if there’s one thing those priests know about, it’s marriage. Similar warnings are coming from other faith-leaders and the rightwing commentators.
"And it’s all because of those pesky gays...
"When otherwise intelligent people rely on such specious arguments, you have to wonder whether it isn’t because they daren’t say what they truly believe – that gays are lesser human beings who should be denied the same rights as others. It would be wrong to tar everyone in this way, but it is striking how many of the most vociferous objections come from those with a less-than-stellar record on gay rights..."

Robert Shrimsley writing in the surprisingly homophile FT Weekend Magazine.
This is probably my favourite thing I've read on gay marriage during the last fortnight's print vomitorium.
The worst could be this avalanche of cow dung by Simon Heffer in the Mail; 'The Real Bigots In The Gay Marriage Row Are The Liberals'.
Well, there's just no arguing with logic like that, is there? 
Oh, and for the record The Daily Telegraph has published 21 articles on gay marriage in the last seven days.
Obsessed?
I would classify two as neutral - only one was in support of marriage equality.
They must be very pleased with themselves.

Update: Just to wrong foot me, the Telegraph has just put this up on its website; 'Francis Maude, the minister for the Cabinet Office, has told how his brother’s death from Aids led him to rethink his views on homosexuality and become a firm believer in gay marriage'
This still means that only one in ten Telegraph stories about gay marriage has been positive.
That's if someone only deciding to be pro-gay rights after a close relative has died of Aids could be considered "positive".

Gay Marriage: 'Bloated Bureaucrats In Brussels To Blame' UKIP

'I bumped into the gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell a few days ago. “Why now?” I asked. Smiling, he told me that it was because he had a case going to the European Court of Human Rights. Of course, stupid me, why didn’t I think of that? There just had to be a European angle.
'I went off and found it, on Peter’s EqualLove website. My legal advice on his case was this. “The case is well-argued and, knowing the politicisation of the ECHR and its general drift, it is almost definitely going to win...
'It has been with the court since last year. The fact that Cameron has suddenly taken up this cause, which has not really been on the horizon at all, suggests that the case is heading towards an imminent hearing and his legal advice is the same as mine.'

Nigel Farage, UKIP leader, writing in the Daily Express.
UKIP are opposed to gay marriage, natch.
Both Pink News and Pink Paper have recently given these "Brownshirts In Blazers" space to put their shitty case.

The Footyball: Come Again?

"I have never come across a gay footballer."

John Fashanu - Justin Fashanu's in-no-way-mad brother - during what can be only be described as "a bizarre, rambling, incoherent rant" on talkSPORT Radio.

John also said; "I don’t believe he was gay. Number two, I don’t believe he had affairs with MPs and number three I don’t believe he was having an affair with one of the young ladies from Coronation Street – it was just nonsense. Showbiz."‘If you had a brother who came out and said, “Hey listen, I’m gay” we’d welcome you, say “No problem” but if you had someone who came out and said, “I’m a spaceman” when you’re not a spaceman then that’s a bit silly.'"

Thanks for clearing that up, John.
(Of 'My Gay Brother's An Outcast' fame). 

Brian Sewell: On Being Preposterous

"The idea of two men in a marriage is immediately preposterous.
"Marriage or holy matrimony is to those of a Christian faith that is far more securely founded than on only the annual jollity of a midnight mass more than just a word. It is an age-old theological concept, one of many, all interlinked.
"Must the Catholic Church be compelled by ignorant politicians and hoi polloi to share this sacramental term with homosexuals? I am as queer as any of them but I do not much care for my brethren in crass, demanding mood. By all means dress in ridiculous togs, exchange rings and kisses, guzzle Laurent Perrier, bake a cake and dance the night away, but call it a wedding, an Old English term of even older German origin, with nothing theological about it — and leave marriage to those who still believe in its sanctity."

Brian Sewell, The Evening Standard. 
Or "Brian R Sewell" as Private Eye have aptly dubbed him.
She'll never marry...

Archbishop Of Canterbury Resigns: Gays To Blame

"The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, is to resign after a bruising battle with liberals over the future of the Anglican Communion and the issue of homosexuality...
"The Archbishop was appointed largely because of his liberal credentials but disappointed the liberal wing of the Church by siding with conservatives over the issue of gay priests.
"Sources close to Dr Williams said that the final straw was the prospect of defeat over the Anglican Communion Covenant, which was drawn up to find common ground around which the various provinces could unite after the ordination of an openly gay bishop, Gene Robinson, by the US episcopal church..."

The Times.

'Rowan Williams to stand down day after government gives the go-ahead for gay marriage ... so will Britain now have its first black Archbishop of Canterbury?'

Mail Online headline. 
Whilst part of me wants to think the Mail is drawing a rather spurious link, Williams must have realised what people would read into the timing.
So the race is now on to find his successor.
The Archbishop Of York, John Sentamu?
He's clearly mentally ill, a raging homophobe and publicity whore.
Should be a shoo-in.

The Daily Telegraph: A Flame That Never Went Out

"What is being proposed here is not a minor social tweak, but a fundamental redefinition of an ancient institution, partly in order to signify the “modern” values of David Cameron’s Tories. In pursuing this reform, the Government has created a neat, but disingenuous, conceit: namely that if you believe the estate of marriage is a benign and stabilising influence then you must also favour marriage between two men or two women. They go further: Lynne Featherstone, the equalities minister, said opposition to gay marriage was fanning the flames of “dark ages” homophobia. This is unfortunate rhetoric. If anything, it is the Government’s attempt to change the law that risks reigniting anti-homosexual bigotry"

The Daily Telegraph leader column.
And you can fuck right off, too. 
With its endless stream of anti-gay marriage stories over the last two weeks, the flames of the Telegraph's homophobia have clearly never gone out.
What I find most depressing/infuriating about this is that they must have consciously decided to take an anti-gay editorial line.
That must have been a fun meeting.  

• See also 'Cameron's Battle Begins: Determined to secure a legacy, the PM has picked a fight with his own voters' - New Statesman.

Equal Civil Marriage: And Now The Fun Starts...

Oh do fuck off!
I'm gay-married out.
See you in the morning.

x

Update: "GAY MARRIAGE: Wedding cakes, bridesmaids, first dances, parties and speeches to be banned over fears homosexuals will be offended" DM Reporter tweet.

Equal Marriage: Equal Polls?

With almost uncanny timing Populus have released yet another poll on gay marriage.
Their survey says... support is now at 65% - or a more headline-hugging two-thirds.
This is up from 61% from the oft-cited poll that Populus conducted for The Times in 2009.
Oft-cited by gay marriage advocates, that is.
The result is significantly higher than support shown in recent polls by both the Telegraph/ICM (45%) and The Sunday Times/YouGov (43%).
And it's three times as high as the loopy poll Catholic Voices/ComRes poll which had 22% for gay marriage, but 70% against.
How Catholic Voices/ComRes skewed their "findings" with a heavily loaded question has been pulled apart, but why is there such a large disparity between Populus and The Sunday Times and Telegraph?
The statement Populus asked people to agree or disagree with seems pretty straight-forward; "Gay couples should have an equal right to get married, not just to have civil partnerships".
But the ever fascinating and pretty reliable Full Fact argues that how all of the four pollsters phrased their questions may have influenced their results.
"The ICM and YouGov polls present the most neutral statements as the stimulus for soliciting an opinion, while the ComRes and Populus polls present arguments and ask for affirmation or opposition. The former polls produce similar results while the latter polls show the most extreme findings in favour and in opposition to the Government's plans.
"So while none of the polls on gay marriage are invalid, the methods used by each of them need to be serously taken into account before conclusions are drawn in news reports."
Populus may have asked a leading question, just like Catholic Voices/ComRes did - the technical term here apparently is "affirmation bias" - and support for gay marriage could be markedly lower than the titillating two-thirds they suggest.

Equal Marriage: Heated Debates

Conor Marron from Coalition For Equal Marriage vs the beyond evil Sharon Jones from Cunts For Marriage.
Think it's safe to say Conor wins this one.

Update: Newsnight hosted an embarrassing bunfight - poor show Channel 4.
The subject wasn't brought up on Question Time tonight - presumably the producers thought they'd "done that" last week.
And who could top Will "Nice But Dim" Young?
It was the hot topic on BBC Radio 4's Moral Maze this week.
Sadly, Melanie Phillips was away.
The highlight?
Michael Portillo: ‘Ben, can you confirm that one man cannot impregnate another man and bring about a child?’
Ben Summerskill: ‘I’m surprised you need to ask that question, Michael.’
Michael Portillo: ‘Help me out with the answer.’
Ben Summerskill: ‘I’ll assist you. It’s why you have no children, Michael.'

Equal Civil Marriage: A Consultation

Right, this thing is only a few pages long and it's not very complicated, but in fine...

• It's a consultation document.

• They want you to tell them what you think about introducing civil marriage for same-sex couples.

• But they've already decided they won't let THE GAYS get married in church and that.

• And they've also decided they won't extend civil partnerships to straight couples.

• But then at the end they expressly ask you if you agree with these decisions - quite for why I know not.

• Err, that's it.

What an odd little thing this is.
A "consultation" document that says they've already decided on the two most obvious and most contentious questions, but then asks if you agree with their fait accompli.
What is point?
And if the aim is achieving equality before the law, this will enshrine inequality.
Bizarre.
I do hope people will take a few minutes to fill it in regardless, if only just to express support for equal civil marriage.
The bigots will fill in theirs, you know.

Marriage: Of Convenience

One of the oddest sideshows to the gay marriage debate has been the battle for political ownership of the policy.
This first went public during conference season last year.
The Lib Dems' Lynne Featherstone made ever such a big hurrah about it - as if its possible/promised introduction was a key sign of how they were wrestling Lib Dem policies out of their Conservative coalition partners (Though it was not a Liberal Democrat manifesto pledge, either).
Two weeks later David Cameron turned marriage equality into a keynote of his keynote speech.
Thunder duly stolen.
Today both parties have pushed their big pro-gay guns into the press to announce the launch of the same-sex marriage consultation process.
Lynne Featherstone, the Equalities Minister, is interviewed by The Independent where the journalist concentrates on the bunfight with the Christian lobby that the press have obsessed over of late; "the Liberal Democrat minister appealed for a "calm and reasoned debate" and for her critics to stop using "inflammatory" language after she formally launches the Government's consultation exercise today."
Here's the key quote from Featherstone;
"Ms Featherstone made clear that her mind is already made up, giving a "cast-iron guarantee" that civil gay marriage would become law by the next general election in 2015.
"There is no rolling back whatsoever," she said. "The essential question is not whether we are going to introduce same-sex civil marriage but how."
Yes, exactly - how? 
An enabling law?
By magic?
Who can say?
Over in The Times, Theresa May - self-styled "Conservative Home Secretary and Minister for Equalities" note - writes; 'If Marriage Is Good It Should Be For Everyone'.  
(It's behind the Murdoch paywall, but here's a scan).
Just like The Times and David Cameron, May may be a recent convert to the marriage equality cause, but is now bending over forward to show she's a passionate advocate.
May puts a calming, ever so reasonable and very conservative case, summarised as; "Plans to allow gays to wed will strengthen society and pose no threat at all to the Church."
The Independent article directly mentions the battle for ownership of what's become a flagship policy between the two coalition parties;
"Ms Featherstone is more polite about her Tory critics – even though 50 backbenchers may vote against the plans and another 50 could abstain. "I think the Conservative Party has moved on from where it was," she said. "As Liberal Democrats, we like to enlighten people."
"There was a minor skirmish between the two Coalition parties last autumn over whether Mr Cameron or Ms Featherstone was the driving force behind legalising gay marriage. "I am very grateful to David Cameron for his absolute commitment to this proposal," Ms Featherstone said. "It is a liberal idea, as you would expect from a liberal Equalities minister."
Get 'er! etc etc.
How amusing that the gay marriage debate shows how there are so many hidden seething tensions between these superficially civil coalition partners. 
And what a difficult marriage it is.

Big Fat Gypsy Weddings: I Don't

'A 16-YEAR-old gay lad who had hidden his sexuality from his parents has been outed on TV by blundering Channel 4 bosses.
'He had begged producers not to show footage of him kissing a gay traveller on Big Fat Gypsy Weddings.
'But after telly chiefs aired the clip on Tuesday, he tearfully stormed: “My parents saw it and recognised me. Now everyone knows I’m gay. I feel exploited.
“Coming out should have been my choice, not Channel 4’s.”
'The student, who has asked us to change his name to David, had feared being outed after he noticed a film crew nearby as he kissed a traveller called Mikey at the annual Manchester Pride gay rally last summer.

'When David spotted the camera team, he begged them not to use the footage and did not give permission to broadcast it.

'David said he was not “out” to his family and it would cause him huge problems.

'Producers offered to “blur” his face but he still said he did not want it aired.However, the footage was shown.

'David said his face was barely masked and added his family immediately recognised him from his haircut and pink shirt.

'Last night he said: “The last thing I wanted was to be outed on national TV.

“But that’s exactly what they have done. I am gay but I wasn’t ready to tell my family yet.

“It should have been my choice when to let them know. This is my worst nightmare come true..."

Daily Star. 
Gypsy Boy author, Mikey Walsh, was passionately tweeting about this episode after it was broadcast.
They've now been timed-out, but if memory serves he was pretty angry and felt it was very exploitative.
Some people had wondered if the gay gypsy lad was Mikey Walsh, due to the similar sounding name, Mikey Joyce.
Mikey Walsh said the producers had tried to get him on the programme, he refused, saying this (wonderful) Radio 4 interview was probably the most public thing he'll do.

Mikey is almost inevitably asked his thoughts about the earlier series, My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding, in interviews, and will politely point out it was about Romany Gypsies and his family are Irish travellers.

He's also made no secret that he writes under a pseudonym "out of respect for my family" and has never had his photo published. 

• Watch the episode on 4OD.

Hugo Chavez: Independent Retracts Anti-Gay Slur

The Venezuela Solidarity Campaign today welcomed a decision by The Independent newspaper to retract a story titled: "Chavez's homophobic rant against challenger" (16 February 2012 by Simeon Tegel). The article has been withdrawn from its website.

On its website, The Independent explains: 
"Correction: An article in our foreign pages recently alleged that President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela had indulged in a "homophobic rant" against a political rival. We now accept that President Chavez did no such thing. We are happy to set the record straight."

Venezuela Solidarity Campaign. [Link now broken - sorry].
Here's the mighty Fagburn on this vile slur at the time.

Stephen Gray: An Apology

Yesterday I sent out a tweet knocking Pink News for mentioning in passing; "tomorrow’s government consultation on how to introduce equal marriage rights for gays."
I phoned the Home Office and asked if it was true that the consultation was beginning tomorrow, and was told, no, the consultation was being formally announced.
After exchanging emails with Stephen Gray from Pink News I now understand that the Home Office have in fact been describing the above as the start/launch of the consultation process.
So I was wrong to mock, and I apologise to Stephen.
Maybe it's karma for my cuntery?
(Pink News' story proper on this - written later - is headed; 'Consultation plans for the UK government’s introduction of civil marriage equality for gay couples are expected to be unveiled tomorrow').
I told Stephen that although I have been critical about some things he has written -  which is kind of the point of this blog - I understand that he is doing a difficult job, pretty much editing and writing Pink News on his own.
And also that it's clear he does try to search out stories, explain them, and give background and context, and alternative viewpoints - unlike some.
I ended my first email to Stephen Gray by saying that I think he's one of the good guys of gay journalism, and expressing regret that I hadn't said so before on here.

Gay Marriage: You Fill Me With Inertia

Her Majesty's Hopeless Coalition Government have announced today that they will announce tomorrow that they will begin a consultation soon about that gay marriage thing that they announced last year and promised last June.
Wooh!
Rejoice in that non-news etc. 
I spoke to someone from the Home Office about it earlier and still don't really understand it. 
Basically they're submitting something called a WMS (Written Ministerial Statement), and then they can start consulting some bigots about what they think about it all. 
Probably best not to book your gay-wedding day off work just yet, though.
That's if you've still got a job, of course.
YAY!

Lockheed Martin: Bums Away!

Lockheed Martin, makers of all those simply divine but oh so butch weapons systems, is one of the many reasons I’m proud to live in the free world (And while it’s far from the only reason, it may very well be the stupidest!)

Not only do I love their lethal weapons (!!!), but I’m also a big fan of their business model because of the major emphasis it places on social justice and environmental responsibility. I have a hunch that I’m probably not the only one in the bumder community who loves Lockheed Martin, but I digress...

Well, today — as though any of us needed another reason to love Lockheed Martin — the company went and did this: to show support for the push to legalise same-sex marriage in the United Kingdom of England, they announced that it was renaming its legendary Trident Missile.

The new name? TriBent Missile!

Geddit?

Bombs will now come in pink cannisters displaying a wedding cake with a cake topper featuring a gay couple spitroasting a unicorn under a rainbow-coloured mushroom cloud.

Isn't that adorable?

But best of all you can pretend you're doing something just by sitting back and clapping like a monkey while you watch their profits soar. 

This is a company that really gets it.

PS Oh, apparently Lockheed Martin have only symbolically renamed their Trident Missiles, and none of the above is actually happening, they just wanted some free publicity that made them seem nice.
Happy to oblige, sir! Happy to oblige.

Straight Marriage: Forty Years On

Yet another daft piece in the Telegraph today on the existential threat to THE ENTIRE WORLD posed by same-sex marriage;
'Eight Centuries Of Law Obliterated Overnight'
Really!?
Next time you hear anyone coming up with this old piffle tell them this...
Marriage was only defined in British law as having to be between a man and a woman in 1971.
They'll go batshit, guaranteed!
Toodle-pip.

• Some of the few articles to have come out of this dull debate that haven't bored the nadgers off of me have been about how much marriage has changed over time - a fascinating subject which many gaybashing God-botherers seem blissfully ignorant about.
Here's Greg Jenner on Huffington Post last week, and two (2) fings from today, one from BBC News "magazine", and a great piece by Hywel Williams from the Daily Mail Right Minds blog.
You heard me!
The latter piece is a hoot, blowing intellectual raspberries at just about everything else the Mail has run on this.
Enjoy!

The Independent: Letter Of the Week

Can I claim the first sighting of the year in your paper today (13 March) of people sitting in the sun on Brighton beach? It is always pleasing to know that your photo-journalists go that extra mile to get us the best pictures. As we all know, there are no other beaches in our country worthy of a photograph. Or do your journalists all live in Brighton?

Ian Chambers
Stockport, Cheshire
Letter to The Independent.

Ben & Jerry's: I Scream At Ice Cream

The gay media have obediently reprinted a press release from Ben & Jerry's ice cream about how they have renamed a flavour 'Apple-y Ever After'.
"This March as the UK government debates whether to legalise same sex marriage, we've partnered with gay rights organisation, Stonewall, to raise awareness about the importance of marriage equality by renaming our Apple Pie flavour, Apple-y Ever After!"
Good for them. Hurrah!
An excited Stephen Gray at Pink News writes; "tubs will feature a gay couple atop a wedding cake decorated with rainbows."
Awww...
You can see why he might have thought this, BJs sent out the above graphic of just such a tub. 
I was intrigued by a bit of small print hidden away on on Ben & Jerry's website - click on Q&As here.

Will "Apple-y Ever After" be available as an actual pint?

"Apple-y Ever After" will be symbolically launched to raise awareness for this issue and will not be an actual pint, but only available in selected scoop shops."

Eh?
"Symbolically launched"??!! 
What on Jupiter does that mean? 
Surely they don't mean they haven't actually renamed the apple pie flavour?
So I rang the press office and checked if you can actually buy Apple-y Ever After in tubs in the shops.
"No. It's just in the Scoop Shops."
Ah, those funny things in multiplex cinema foyers.
So they come in a cute little tub with a gay couple on?
"No, in a cone."
So that's what "symbolically" means - it doesn't really exist.
Thanks for erm... nothing. 

Update: Gay Star News were a bit late with this, as per; "There's nothing more romantic than sharing a tub of Ben & Jerry's ice cream with the one you love and now your next scoop could help make gay marriage a reality in the UK..." Oh crap!

Ricky Martin: Glad To Be Che

I see in The Advocate that Latino lover bumboy Ricky Martin is going to play Che Guevara in Evita on Broadway.
Surely Ricky's now fulfilled the textbook career trajectory for today's modern gay Pop star?

1. Enjoy massive success while staying in the closet.
2. Only come out when your star's on the wane.
3. Enjoy brief flurry of renewed media interest.
4. Release "This is the real me" lacklustre solo album to widespread indifference.
5. Join a West End/Broadway/touring musical... *

Bien hecho, señor!

* Becoming a gay dad optional.

Thought For The Day: Dr Jeffrey John

“In the Sixties the Church was in the forefront of the movement to decriminalise homosexuality. The Conservative Party realised ten years ago that the equal treatment of gay people had become a litmus test of basic human decency and changed its view, but it is a test the Church now spectacularly fails...
The fact that fifty years on [after the decriminalisation of homosexuality] the Church is seen as enemy No 1 of gay people is a disaster, both for our own morale and for our mission to the country. We have become the last refuge of prejudice.” 

Dr Jeffrey "Elton" John, Dean Of St Albans.
Quoted in The Times.
They don't say so, but I get the feeling* this must come from a talk he's given/giving, but it's currently UnGooglable.
It's a quiet day in the papers for once on the gay marriage front - thank feck - though it leads The Guardian letters page.
One reader brings up what I'm now calling "The South African Option";

"It involves two changes. The first would be to remove all legal significance from the word marriage and the second would be to make civil partnerships the only union recognised by the state. Those in such partnerships (a man and a woman, two men, or two women) would gain the present advantages given to those now married under the present system.
"The word marriage could then be defined and used by any of the groups without any conflict with a legal definition. Christian marriage and gay marriage are two possible usages that spring to mind, but the only relationship with legal significance that could be had would be a civil partnership. Each side would feel that they had lost something, but it could not be denied that there would be equality."

This is essentially what they did in South Africa - the oft-repeated claim that they introduced "gay marriage" is not strictly true.
I increasingly believe this would be the best option.
It's not a compromise - it just takes the matter out of the hands of both God and the state.

* Not least because The Times mentions the story about John suing the Church of England for discrimination - something he has never said - and don't ask about it.

Bradley Manning: "Cruel And Inhuman Punishment"

"I conclude that the 11 months under conditions of solitary confinement (regardless of the name given to his regime by the prison authorities) constitutes at a minimum cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in violation of article 16 of the convention against torture. If the effects in regards to pain and suffering inflicted on Manning were more severe, they could constitute torture."

Juan Mendez, UN Special Rapporteur On Torture, talking to The Guardian.
His findings have been published as an addendum to the Report Of The Special Rapporteur On Torture, And Other Cruel, Inhuman Or Degrading Treatment Or Punishment.
This means he has formally accused the US of violating the United Nation's Torture Charter. 
For more on Juan Mendez vs the Pentagon - who have consistently refused to let him interview Manning in private - see Bradley Manning Support Network.   
Bradley's next pre-trial hearing is on Thursday March 15th.

Update: Broad coalition of US media outlets, from ABC News to the Washington Post, send Pentagon open letter protesting censorship of Manning trial documents.

Nick Clegg: His Word Is His Bond

'Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg told attendees of the spring Liberal Democrat conference that gay marriage will be introduced before 2015' - Pink Paper.

'At the Liberal Democrats’ Spring Conference this weekend, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg promised the UK’s first gay marriage would take place before 2015 as a result of Liberal Democrats being in government' - Pink News.

"Journalists" who believe everything a politician says - how sweet!

Plan B: ill Manors

State of the nation song of the year blah blah blah.
Can you spot the fleeting (inevitable?) gay marriage reference?
Ironically Plan B fans seem rather fond of calling people they don't like "faggot".
Sometimes they even spell it right.

Marriage: Our Survey Today Says...

The latest YouGov/Sunday Times poll puts support for gay marriage at 43%, tellingly close to the 45% in yesterday's Sunday Telegraph poll.
Though it was nothing like the recent Catholic Voices poll - but that asked a ludicrously convoluted and loaded question.
Anyway, a further 32% said they support civil partnerships, but not gay marriage.
15% opposed both.
The bastards.
When asked by YouGov; "Do you think the Church of England is right or wrong to defend marriage as an institution for just heterosexual couples", 47% thought it was right, 37% wrong.
And 40% agreed that "the language used by the Church of England is encouraging homophobia and hatred to lesbians and gay men."
Funny things, polls.
There was a rather wobbly dichotomy set up in one question; "David Cameron has pledged to fully legalise gay marriage, do you think this is because
"He believes is the right thing to do - 21%
"He does not believe it is right, but is doing it for political reasons - 63%"
I think he thinks it's right, but is mainly doing it for political reasons. 
But 62% of people agreed that same-sex relationships are "as valid as heterosexual relationships" so everything's just fine and dandy so stop your gay moaning.
Here's the YouGov page, you can open up a PDF at the bottom which breaks things down by everything from age to shoe size.

Update: New Statesman have turned the above into a handsome chart of pies...

The Guardian had the inspired idea of sending a reporter along to yesterday's Designer Civil Partnership show in London and asking couples what they made of all this Christian crowing about gay marriage.
As did The Independent.
And The Times.
Oops!

• The Times also sent a reporter to witness a priest reading out the cardinals' letter at the Church of St Benedict, Ealing Abbey, west London.
But sadly neglected to mention that St Benedict's school is currently caught up in a huge child abuse scandal. 
They were lucky to find a priest who's not in prison.