X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week. If you receive it, you’ll also find your subscriber number at the top of our weekly highlights email.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.spectator.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050. If you’ve only just subscribed, you may not yet have been issued with a subscriber number. In this case you can use the temporary web ID number, included in your email order confirmation.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

If you have any difficulties creating an account or logging in please take a look at our FAQs page.

Blogs

Surely Katie Price demeans marriage more than gay marriage ever could?

3 April 2013

1:11 PM

3 April 2013

1:11 PM

The right of gays to have a civil marriage in a non-religious service is once again an issue. There have been large and slightly violent protests in Paris as well as on-going judicial contortions in the US. I know my support for gay marriage appears to put me in a minority among conservatives. But perhaps I could ask a question of my opponents?

One of the things that opponents of gay civil marriage always say is that gay marriage would ‘undermine’, ‘distort’ or otherwise ‘demean’ existing marriage. Many people – continuing to mix up civil and religious marriage – claim that the ‘sanctity’ of religious heterosexual marriage will be undermined by a civil, non-religious, homosexual marriage. I cannot help thinking that this line of thought would be more persuasive if the same critics held their line when it comes to what some might argue is the non-gay ‘demeaning’ of marriage. Allow me an example.

[Alt-Text]


On Good Friday the topless model Jordan, aka Katie Price, married again. It is the third or fourth time she has married. This time she has married a part-time stripper who she apparently knew for six weeks before they got engaged. It is slightly tricky counting Ms Price’s marriages because each one includes a lot of mini-‘marriages’ – restating of vows, re-marrying, doing it again for the cameras and so on. Her life is lived out in front of – and, it would seem, for – the celebrity adoring public. Specifically it is covered extensively in that extraordinary new genre of celebrity magazine which has grown in a few years from almost nothing to taking up whole shelves of supermarket space. Ms Price’s own step-father has described her weddings as being like ‘groundhog day’. This latest one – covered on the front-pages of last weekend’s tabloids – apparently had a Willy-Wonka theme with the couple on vast thrones and surrounded by giant sweets.

I have no reason to wish Ms Price anything but personal happiness, but it should not take a cynic to notice that her weddings all have certain things in common: a new love, a high degree of publicity and cash. Perhaps one of the advantages of marriage in the eyes of Ms Price can be sensed from the fact that her ‘people’ apparently asked a friend of hers who used to be on a television show to remove a photo from the wedding that the friend had put on Twitter. Early-bird photo-releases like this apparently risk spoiling the highly lucrative magazine deals – with OK, Hello and the like – which Jordan will have once again sold for a five or six figure sum.

If the people who object to civil gay marriage really are concerned about the undermining of the sanctity of marriage would they not be better exercised by railing against Willy Wonka themed weddings of celebrities cashing in on magazine deals for the umpteenth time? If you were concerned to imbue the next generation with the importance, significance and perhaps even the sanctity of marriage would this not be a more appropriate target than any gay couple asking for the right just once to say ‘I do’?

Give something clever this Christmas – a year’s subscription to The Spectator for just £75. And we’ll give you a free bottle of champagne. Click here.


Show comments
Close