Party losing Liberalness over Gay Marriage?

I am hoping that what I have read recently turns out to be false, if it is not then we have some serious problems within the party.

I read that Lynne Featherstone MP, minister for equalities is pushing for the up coming vote in the Commons on Gay marriage to be whipped so MPs "Should" vote "Yes" rather than voting with their conscience.

Now I'm not a religious man, I lost my faith as a young man and my faith is in Liberty, Chivalry and democracy and I feel that whipping this vote is wrong.

I'm all for Gay marriage. If two people love each other and want to commit before their friends, family and their God then so be it - I think it is the only right thing to do and for me there is nothing more important than standing for love.

But people with religious views will disagree. The Bible and Qu'ran have clear cut views on Homosexuality and although many religious folk are accepting there are still those who feel strongly that it is an affront to God. You can label the Homophobes or Zealots as much as you will but each persons faith and belief is sacred to them and will not be changed just because You tell them its wrong.

My question is - who are we to tell people what to believe?

Now, I don't agree with Nadine Dorries, nor did I agree with the abortion clause that she wanted to add to the NHS bill but the vote on abortion was left as a vote of conscience. I know that Greg Mulholland who voted for it was labelled a religious pro-life zealot in some circles, I saw the tweets, but he stood by his beliefs, convictions and faith.

I really believe that this should be done with the Gay Marriage issue too. It is a matter of conscience not party and should be left as such and although I hope and trust that the motion will be passed I also hope that people will vote with their consciences and not because they are instructed to. If their belief's are being dictated by the Government then it flies in the face of everything this Party (and I) stands for and believes in - which is why I hope that the original statement is indeed false.