Gay marriage

by Richard on May 21, 2013

I understand that gay marriage is controversial. I absolutely get that not everyone will agree that having gay marriage enshrined in British law is a Good Thing. Many conservatives don’t accept that parliament is entitled to pass such a law. Principled disagreement has to be quite proper, and questioning whether ‘marriage’ is a proper term for a gay relationship is not of itself ‘anti-gay’.

But there really is no excuse for some of the arrant nonsense I’m reading today. Norman Tebbit’s latest outpourings are one thing, but no more than we’ve come to expect. I was surprised by Archbishop Cranmer’s outpouring though

Gordon Wilson, former leader of the SNP, has warned that gay marriage will lead to ‘state fascism’. Those who oppose will be cast as bigots, Nazis and fascists ( or ’swivel-eyed loons’) ranged against the moderate, enlightened and utterly reasonable proponents. …

How many Christians will be targeted and harassed by ‘aggressive homosexuals’ - the homosexualists - simply in order ‘to get media attention’? And don’t think it’s only the Christians: the crusading gays are ferociously unforgiving in condemnation of their moderate dissenting co-sexualists (see here, here and here).To the rabid, intolerant homosexualist, a gay person who doesn’t support gay marriage is ‘like the token Asian guy who wants to be in the BNP’. Nice, huh?

We will doubtless be seeing an awful lot more of this: The Attorney General Dominic Grieve has warned of the ‘profound difficulties’ ahead for those who dissent from the state’s redefinition of marriage. We will surely see Christian ministers and schoolteachers dragged before commissions and inquisitions, and they will be judged ‘guilty’ irrespective of the religious conscience. Their crime will simply have been that of preaching a sermon or delivering a lesson expressing some concern about the gay agenda or casting some doubt upon the validity of gay marriage. But someone will complain about ‘hurt feelings’ (whether truly hurt or not), and these preachers and teachers will be arrested, prosecuted, fined or imprisoned. The only means of avoiding this will be self-censorship: the mere discussion of homosexuality will become taboo.

When people start raving like that, the only proper response is ridicule.

{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }

1

Kim 05.21.13 at 6:20 pm

Ironically, when the real Archbishop Cranmer, against the will of Rome, let alone the teaching of Jesus, sanctioned the royal divorce and remarriage of Henry VIII, the rhetoric was even more apocalyptic (and, of course, Cranmer was excommunicated by Clement VII). All that’s missing in the current flatulent rhetoric is an adapatation Niemöller’s famous text “First they came for the Socialists, then … the Trade Unionists, then … the Jews, … then they came for Those Who Are Against Gay Marriage …”

BTW, while resolutely believing that the church should bless civil partnerships (and, for that matter, gay partnerships unrecognised by the state), I am one of those folk you mention who remains unconvinced about the wisdom of the discourse of gay “marriage”. But, yes, the end-of-civilization, advent-of-Antichrist rantings of the opposition have gone off the Richter scale of both sanity and decency.

2

Richard 05.21.13 at 8:29 pm

I’d remembered that you were less than enthusiastic about gay marriage. I just didn’t have a link to where you’d said so to hand. Leslie Griffiths is another that springs to mind.

3

d 05.21.13 at 8:34 pm

“…….should bless civil partnerships.”

(Law) a legal union or contract, similar to a marriage, between two people of the same sex.

Partnership can be defines as an agreement between more than 2 persons.

Why does the state have the right to limit the partnership to “two” persons?

Are tran-sexuals and bisexuals discriminated under the “2″ person limit?
Should polygamy be legal?

What right or interest does the state have in limiting how many and who can marry who?

What is the correct age for a person to be able to marry?
Does the state have the right to set limits on age related to adulthood?

4

Richard 05.21.13 at 9:56 pm

Are those really questions, or are you making a point?

5

Rebecca 05.21.13 at 10:18 pm

[comment deleted by admin: cutting and pasting idiocy from other places on the www won't do]

Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>