I Guess I’m An ‘Extremist’ With ‘Fringe Views’ Too?

The MP for Lincoln, Karl McCartney, has defended his controversial comments on same-sex marriage which sparked outrage.

And just what were they?

In a letter to one of his constituents seen by the Echo, Mr McCartney wrote that he refused to support the campaign for gay marriage.

He said he believed the Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) community had “exhausted the cause of equal rights”.

He also added that his “conscience dictates” that he will not canvas other MPs to support the campaign for gay marriage and that “change is not necessary”.

Well, it’s hard to see what is controversial or outrageous about that.

It pretty much describes most people’s views, doesn’t it?

The comments caused uproar from LGBT groups across the country and a petition was launched to encourage Mr McCartney to retract his comments.

But Mr McCartney has since told the Echo that while he is not prejudiced against members of the LGBT community, he stands by his belief that “a religious marriage is one between an individual man and individual woman”.

Why does it have to be stated so baldly that, if you don’t simply slavishly agree with everything that a particular identity group believes or wants, that’s not evidence of ‘prejudice’?

No more is ‘tolerance’ the watchword, now total submission, agreement with and even celebration of whatever a particular group wants is demanded.

And failure to provide this is then seen as ‘prejudice’.

“I also support the commitment and love between individuals, regardless of their sex or gender, and feel that it should be encouraged, supported and celebrated. I believe civil partnerships do this.”

And so do I – I’ve been to a few, too!

But the usual suspects are on their high horses and refusing to dismount:

Lucy Rigby, prospective parliamentary candidate for the Lincoln Labour Party, said Mr McCartney’s views flew in the face of his own political party.

She said: “I thought Karl’s letter was offensive, wrong and, to be frank, quite bizarre.

“When you receive a letter like that as a constituent, Karl reveals himself to be a holder of some pretty odd views and, to put it in context, he’s even contradicted by his own party.

“People in Lincoln want a sensible and intelligent MP that gets stuff done – they don’t want an extremist with these fringe views.”

But Lucy, they aren’t actually getting one, are they? His views are more mainstream than you’d care to acknowledge.

And that’s a real problem for you, clearly.

8 comments for “I Guess I’m An ‘Extremist’ With ‘Fringe Views’ Too?

  1. April 30, 2012 at 10:13 am

    “His views are more mainstream than you’d care to acknowledge.”

    They are indeed and I bet many people are sick of being told otherwise.

  2. April 30, 2012 at 11:32 am

    The abuse of “equal rights” has led to the tyranny of minorities. Yet another HUGE hand for Labour, the masters of the complete and utter cock-up.

  3. Mudplugger
    April 30, 2012 at 1:12 pm

    The best way to resolve this would be to remove from all religious institutions the right to ‘certify’ any marriages.
    Then all such ‘partnerships’, be they same-sex or otherwise, would only be certified by the standard State process, conducted by the State-appointed Registrar.

    If any couple wished to have a second ‘service’ for whatever reason under the aegis of their chosen religion, then that’s a personal/commercial matter between that couple and the religion concerned. The State’s out of it.

    To achieve this, if it proves necessary to disestablish the Church of England, then that’s a bonus. And bye-bye to 26 unelected Bishops in the House of Lords at the same time – another bonus.

    • April 30, 2012 at 1:39 pm

      Or we could leave both of them out of it and let people enter into purely private contracts…

      • Mudplugger
        April 30, 2012 at 3:47 pm

        I agree – in principle, private contracts should be best.

        Trouble is, we probably need State certification to help cover/avoid ‘inappropriate’ partnerships, particularly those of an incestuous nature, or those entered into for faux-immigration purposes etc. Similarly, because national tax and financial benefits are conveyed by formalised partnership (IHT etc.), again some formal supervision is necessary to validate qualification.

        But just keep it minimum and keep the god-botherers out of it.

        • May 2, 2012 at 5:43 am

          Well, as The Thought Gang points out, go for a ‘state only’ wedding and you’ll pay through the nose!

  4. john in cheshire
    April 30, 2012 at 1:25 pm

    It sounds as if Mr McCartney is, on this matter at least, doing what he is elected to do; represent his constituents regardless of what his party might adopt as policy. Ms Rigby might do well to remember that, should she ever be elected. I’m sick of pressure groups having more clout than they deserve and bigots in the socialist world transferring their warped beliefs and prejudices onto the rest of us.

    • April 30, 2012 at 1:37 pm

      Quite so. And as Julia points out, his position on this is likely to reflect the majority opinion among his constituents. Nice, just for once, to be able to say something positive about a politician.

Comments are closed.