Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister (remember) has made a farcical attempt to retract his painting of anyone opposing so called gay marriage as bigots. This is the same Nick Clegg that castigated Gordon Brown because GB called an indignant member of the public, a bigot, during the last election campaign.
I can understand that Clegg thinks it 'right on' to support this policy (or maybe he has been told to support it by the wife?) but why try to follow the example of Lynne Featherstone and further stifle debate, by insulting genuine opponents, who hold dearly felt opinions?
Featherstone, you may remember, launched a 'consultation' process advising that no matter what the outcome of this process, they (the government) would go ahead as planned. I asked at the time, what was the point of a consultation exercise that would have zero bearing on the issue being consulted upon but answer came there none. I know, at least she is being honest as it is unlikely that any consultation process actually changes anything but..........
I must be a bigot since I thought we lived in a representative democracy and my view had some value - seems not, if it isn't in 100% agreement with Clegg.
I have written on this proposed legislation before and predicted that the so-called 'we won't force churches to marry homosexuals ' assurance would not stand-up to a ECHR challenge and that is exactly what most commentators are now saying. Some have suggested that the only way for churches to avoid charges of discrimination would be to not have any weddings no heterosexual and therefore no homosexual.
Sounds like a plan to me! I can just imagine Cameron and Clegg and Salmond going up against the massed ranks of all those people who consider a church marriage absolutely required.
Come on CofE and the Catholic hierarchy, let's see some leadership! Make the people see the consequences of this stupid and unnecessary legislation.
Oh and by the way, the economy is still in the toilet. Let's not worry about that though!
I can understand that Clegg thinks it 'right on' to support this policy (or maybe he has been told to support it by the wife?) but why try to follow the example of Lynne Featherstone and further stifle debate, by insulting genuine opponents, who hold dearly felt opinions?
Featherstone, you may remember, launched a 'consultation' process advising that no matter what the outcome of this process, they (the government) would go ahead as planned. I asked at the time, what was the point of a consultation exercise that would have zero bearing on the issue being consulted upon but answer came there none. I know, at least she is being honest as it is unlikely that any consultation process actually changes anything but..........
I must be a bigot since I thought we lived in a representative democracy and my view had some value - seems not, if it isn't in 100% agreement with Clegg.
I have written on this proposed legislation before and predicted that the so-called 'we won't force churches to marry homosexuals ' assurance would not stand-up to a ECHR challenge and that is exactly what most commentators are now saying. Some have suggested that the only way for churches to avoid charges of discrimination would be to not have any weddings no heterosexual and therefore no homosexual.
Sounds like a plan to me! I can just imagine Cameron and Clegg and Salmond going up against the massed ranks of all those people who consider a church marriage absolutely required.
Come on CofE and the Catholic hierarchy, let's see some leadership! Make the people see the consequences of this stupid and unnecessary legislation.
Oh and by the way, the economy is still in the toilet. Let's not worry about that though!
No comments:
Post a Comment