Further to my previous post about my email to my MP, I have now received a reply, which is below.

I'm rather disappointed because it addresses none of the points raised in my email and is instead a standard email which seems to be written for people who are opposed to marriage equality.

Not great when the constituent you're writing to has told you they're bisexual.

Dear Vicky,

Thank you for your recent email regarding the very important issue of gay marriage.


Please be assured I take this matter very seriously and have taken the opportunity over the past few weeks to discuss the numerous potential ramifications with both colleagues and constituents.


I am conscious that many of my constituents hold profound religious beliefs and I have no intention to support any legislation which would force any church to hold marriage ceremonies which are in contravention of their theology.


However, I do believe it is important that we should encourage commitment within relationships and am broadly supportive of initiatives that seek to do so.


As you will be aware, this issue did not feature in the Queen’s Speech which will be welcomed by many people who perceived this as an attack on the Church of England.


I do feel it is critically important that the Government is properly aware of the level of concern on this issue.


I have been struck by the number of constituents who have contacted me with their views rather than, as is so often the case nowadays, sending me standardised, computer generated emails, but have taken the trouble to set out very clearly their personal and considered objections to the suggestion that rules governing marriage may change.


The consultation on same sex marriage has now closed and I look forward to hearing the results in due course. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.


With best wishes,

Caroline Nokes

Further to my previous post about my email to my MP, I have now received a reply, which is below.

I'm rather disappointed because it addresses none of the points raised in my email and is instead a standard email which seems to be written for people who are opposed to marriage equality.

Not great when the constituent you're writing to has told you they're bisexual.

Dear Vicky,

Thank you for your recent email regarding the very important issue of gay marriage.


Please be assured I take this matter very seriously and have taken the opportunity over the past few weeks to discuss the numerous potential ramifications with both colleagues and constituents.


I am conscious that many of my constituents hold profound religious beliefs and I have no intention to support any legislation which would force any church to hold marriage ceremonies which are in contravention of their theology.


However, I do believe it is important that we should encourage commitment within relationships and am broadly supportive of initiatives that seek to do so.


As you will be aware, this issue did not feature in the Queen’s Speech which will be welcomed by many people who perceived this as an attack on the Church of England.


I do feel it is critically important that the Government is properly aware of the level of concern on this issue.


I have been struck by the number of constituents who have contacted me with their views rather than, as is so often the case nowadays, sending me standardised, computer generated emails, but have taken the trouble to set out very clearly their personal and considered objections to the suggestion that rules governing marriage may change.


The consultation on same sex marriage has now closed and I look forward to hearing the results in due course. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.


With best wishes,

Caroline Nokes

Dear Caroline,

I'm sure you know about the current consultation about marriage equality. There are a few reasons I feel allowing same-sex couples to marry in civil ceremonies are necessary:

1. Currently even countries which have same-sex marriage don't recognise UK's civil partnerships.
2. When a married trans* person wants to be legally recognised as the opposite gender, they have to get divorced and then enter into a civil partnership with their spouse.
3. Having separate institutions for same-sex and opposite-sex couples means that future governments would be able to legislate differently for them (granted the Equality Act would have to be repealed first, but this isn't beyond the realms of possibility).

On a personal note, as a bisexual woman if I were to enter into a long term, committed relationship, I would like the option to marry them, whatever their gender.

So on that note, I'd like to ask, if it came to a vote in Parliament, between the status quo and allowing same-sex couples to marry in civil ceremonies, what would your vote be?

Yours,

Vicky Syred

Dear Caroline,

I'm sure you know about the current consultation about marriage equality. There are a few reasons I feel allowing same-sex couples to marry in civil ceremonies are necessary:

1. Currently even countries which have same-sex marriage don't recognise UK's civil partnerships.
2. When a married trans* person wants to be legally recognised as the opposite gender, they have to get divorced and then enter into a civil partnership with their spouse.
3. Having separate institutions for same-sex and opposite-sex couples means that future governments would be able to legislate differently for them (granted the Equality Act would have to be repealed first, but this isn't beyond the realms of possibility).

On a personal note, as a bisexual woman if I were to enter into a long term, committed relationship, I would like the option to marry them, whatever their gender.

So on that note, I'd like to ask, if it came to a vote in Parliament, between the status quo and allowing same-sex couples to marry in civil ceremonies, what would your vote be?

Yours,

Vicky Syred