Two nights ago, the hardest punches thrown in the fight over Section 28 were delivered by fearless Oxford peer Baroness Janet Young, writes Anna Melville-James.
She whipped up enough support in the Lords to throw out the Government's bid to repeal the controversial clause.
With a victory margin of 210 to 165 votes against repeal, supporters of Section 28 are confident the result reflects public opinion, something some have seen as sidelined in favour of "a chattering class obsession".
Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988 states that a local authority shall not 'promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality' or 'promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship.' Baroness Young, who is one of its most ardent supporters, tabled the amendment to remove the repeal proposals from the new Local Government Bill, due to go before the House ofCommons.
Leading the attack, she said: "I believe that there is not a moral equivalent between heterosexual and homosexual relationships. I believe we need to set in front of children an ideal by which they should live."
The baroness, a former leader of Oxford City Council, welcomed the support for her proposal in the House of Lords.
She told the Oxford Mail: "I am very pleased with the result - it's a bigger victory than I expected. I had support from peers from all parts of the house, including some Labour and Liberal Democrats. Mostly importantly though, the House of Lords has spoken for the people." Many of the Section 28 debates have focused on arguments by MPs, church officials, gay rights activists and educationalists on moral, ethical or legal grounds.
Baroness Young is clear that her motivation to block repeal is based not only on her own views, but also on those of the concerned public.
"I have had more than 2000 letters from the public - from doctors, teachers and social workers, to parents and grandparents, expressing concern over the possible repeal of Section 28. Let's make it absolutely clear here that it is children in school we are talking about.
"Many members of the public do not want homosexuality promoted to their children as a lifestyle that is equally good. These concerns are the reason that the clause was originally introduced," she says. But it is the use of the word 'promotion' in the legislature that has caused much of the confusion and controversy over Section 28. Critics argue that the clause is discriminatory and prevents teachers from discussing homosexuality as a valid alternative to heterosexual life. They say that homophobic bullying is increasing in schools as a result of this gag on tolerance and understanding.
Baroness Young disagrees: "As I understand it, promotion is the encouragement of something - if you were to look in the dictionary that's one alternative there. You don't want children thinking that life is like one big supermarket where you simply wander in and take what you want.
"Children are being asked to make decisions about their future with no experience of life and they don't even know what many of these things really mean." She also argues that Section 28 is a guideline, and as such has no force in law.
She says: "Section 28 is a good thing because it acts as a benchmark. It doesn't stop teachers discussing homosexuality, it just stops the 'promotion' of it."
Her concerns about 'promotion' of homosexuality extend beyond schools.
"Since the introduction of Section 28, many local authorities, including Oxfordshire, have got round this by publishing material through the Health Authority, to give to youth groups and so forth and, in some cases, to children. Some of the material I have seen has been appalling and I think any responsible parent doesn't want it. To stop that would require fresh legislation, which you couldn't do now through the Local Government Bill, but it's something to be considered for the future." But why should young minds be denied the opportunity to consider alternative lifestyles to the heterosexual two-parent family relationship?
The central point, says Baroness Young, is not to look at Section 28 as an isolated crusade.
"I am most concerned about the break-up of the structure of our society with high divorce rates, people living together and so on. It means children grow up in difficult and uncertain world. This debate is important as part of the whole view of society.
"All legislation sends a signal, and I believe it should speak for the people."
Story date: Wednesday 09 February
Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article