JCRs “appalled” at Oxford MP’s plans to vote against gay marriage
By Ruth Maclean
JCRs across the University have written to an Oxford MP expressing dismay at her intention to oppose the government’s proposed gay marriage legislation.
The JCR Presidents have written a draft letter to express their shock at the intentions of Nicola Blackwood, whose constituency contains nine colleges. The letters also attempt to cast her views as those of a minority, especially among the student population.
So far the letter has been signed by the JCR Presidents at St Anne’s, Queen’s, Exeter, St Peter’s, Wadham and Somerville.
The letter states: “We are appalled to hear of your intention to oppose legislation on equal marriage and believe it inadequately represents your constituency considering its high student population.”
They continue by asking the MP “to realise that there is a silent majority out there, in your constituency, that haven’t contacted you yet”.
Nicola Blackwood, whose constituency, is home to nine Oxford colleges, has expressed her opposition to same-sex marriage in letters to constituents, saying: “I am not an enthusiast for this change and it is clear that this is a view shared by the majority of my constituents who have contacted me so far.”
Of those colleges whose JCR President signed the letter, only Somerville lies in the Oxford West constituency. But the Presidents emphasise that “while not all of our colleges lie in your constituency, nine do, and all have students living in the boroughs of Jericho and Summertown”.
Somerville JCR President Marsha Sudar said: “Somerville prides itself on being an open, forward thinking and liberal college where students have the freedom to express themselves in a supportive and caring environment.”
The JCRs are also preparing a petition to attach to the letter, which can be signed via email or by liking a post on Facebook. They hope to pressure the MP to change her position on this issue by highlighting the opposition of the student body to her views.
The post received 80 likes in its first three hours.
It transpired Ms Blackwood is against the introduction of same-sex marriage after she said so in letters to constituents who wrote to her on the issue. She summarised her opposition to the proposals, saying: “I do not believe in legislation for the sake of it or where it will produce unintended consequences.”
She cited one of these “unintended consequences” as being the risk of human rights challenges to religious organisations who choose not to marry same-sex couples. Critics fear that any law will open the door to prosecution on the grounds of ‘discrimination’. But supporters insist that the proposed legislation contains a ‘quadruple-lock’ to prevent legal challenges of this type, including amending the Equality Act 2010 to ensure religious organisations cannot be prosecuted for refusing to marry same-sex couples.
Ms Blackwood seems to have since softened her opposition, saying: “From the beginning my concern with the Government’s proposals has not related to the definition of marriage, but rather its potential to expose churches or individuals to litigation. The Government is clearly concerned about this too, as can be seen by its stated intention to implement the so-called ‘quadruple lock’, and I shall be carefully following the proposals as they develop.”
But she also stated her belief that “the proposed changes will confer no further legal gains than those conferred by civil partnerships”.
Matthew Robinson, Somerville LGBTQ Rep, said in a letter to the MP that this was “a gross misunderstanding of what the LGBTQ community seek”.
“It is not solely acknowledgement that we desire, it is rather equality; something which cannot and will never be gained through the distinction between heterosexual and same-sex marriage.”
He added that the current arrangement “suggests that the love and relationships of heterosexual and same-sex partners are distinct and separate, when in reality they are one and the same”.
Ms Blackwood’s constituency, Oxford West and Abingdon, contains Worcester, Somerville, Lady Margaret Hall, St Hugh’s, St Antony’s, Green Templeton, St Cross and Wolfson.
She won her seat in 2010 by just 176 votes, taking the seat from the Liberal Democrats.
PHOTO/independent
David Skinner
19/12/2012 at 18:00
“Somerville JCR President Marsha Sudar said: “Somerville prides itself on being an open, forward thinking and liberal college where students have the freedom to express themselves in a supportive and caring environment.”
Clearly Marsha is having a severe attack of brain irritations. In addition to “Pride,” “forward thinking, ” why didn’t she chuck in ” “diversity”, “non- discrimination”, “tolerance,” “inclusion” and all the other gobbledygook, associated with a tired and past its sell by date ideology? She and others like her are the one’s stuck in the past, fossilised in Darwinian/ cultural Marxism. Does she not know? Has she not heard that if the whole of society becomes gay, then according to evolution she and her kind will just die out.
Matthew Robinson’s insistence that a man placing his penis in a meat mincer, or another man’s waste passage is equal to a man’s placing his member into a vagina puts a big question over the state of his mind. This is like saying that because all drivers enjoy the thrill of motion, then all procedures for driving on the highway are equal. That it doesn’t matter which side of the road one drives, or whether one stops or accelerates through red lights.
Alan Reynolds
19/12/2012 at 18:12
Of course it’s not about equality. Civil partnerships already provide that. The course set by the Prime Minister and the LBGT agenda will continue to erode the institution that has been under attack for decades. Academia seems to ignore science or prefers to invent it. Born gay? If true then why in over 25 years has nobody been able to confirm it.
Peter
19/12/2012 at 18:34
Pretty stupid comments so far
rhaoeps
20/12/2012 at 11:42
@David Skinner – your analogy of lawless roads does not hold good. Driving without due regard to public rules puts other people at a real risk of harm and is a threat to life. Private acts between consenting adults affect only themselves. I cannot see any social benefit to restricting marriage to heterosexual couples. Those objecting to same-sex marriage will not be affected by it in any way, except perhaps their blood pressure rising as they sit sipping coffee whilst browsing nonsense such as the Daily Heil.
That said, I am highly reluctant to support the passing of non-urgent laws that have not been put to the electorate for approval. Contrary to David Cameron’s public assertions, I do not think his personal belief that it is “the right thing to do” is a good enough reason for passing laws, just as Tony Blair’s belief that Iraq was “the right thing to do” was no justification for war.
James Newton
21/12/2012 at 21:45
It was put to the electorate and they voted for the party who proposed it. http://www.conservatives.com/News/News_stories/2010/05/Our_contract_for_equality.aspx
rhaoeps
25/12/2012 at 16:15
@James Newton – if you care to read the document you have usefully linked to, it contained only a pledge to “consider the case” – the case was accordingly considered, and overwhelmingly rejected in a public consultation, yet Mr Cameron insists on proceeding regardless, doubtless on his gut instinct that it is the “right thing to do”.
John Ralph
27/12/2012 at 10:51
Equality is about having the same legal rights, since when is equality about changing what nouns mean?
Edmund Potts
02/01/2013 at 13:44
David Skinner, know who else was a rightwing lunatic obsessed with his own miconceptions about “cultural marxism”?
Anders Behring Breivik.
Just sayin’…