Saturday, August 3, 2013

Homosexuals and Marriage

Wherever David Cameron and the rest of those parliamentarians are resting their heads at the moment, the sound that awakens them this morning isn't a bucolic morning cockerel - it is the sound of chickens coming home to roost!

Almost one year ago today, I posted here  http://bit.ly/1cmqqUd  about the then pending Same Sex Marriage Act.  See also here http://bit.ly/17pGgGw


In this post, I commented

I believe voters will see through the government's meaningless promises that 'no religious organisation will be compelled to offer marriage to homosexuals on religious sites'.  Everyone knows that this is rubbish and that before the ink is dry on the legislation, the homosexual advocates, for whom no amount of progress is ever enough (until perhaps homosexuals are in the ascendancy and heterosexuals are a down-trodden minority), will be pushing for marriages to take place in churches and claiming all sorts of 'human rights abuses' when they are denied.  We have seen this all before.

As predicted a homosexual couple, Barrie and Tony Drewitt-Barlow, have said that they will challenge the so called 'quadruple lock' that parliament put into the legislation.  This is the same couple that achieved a certain fame by becoming, in 1999 the first homosexual parents to be named on a child's birth certificate. 

This couple are said to own and run a surrogacy agency and so perhaps the notoriety from this challenge will be good for their business.  Though I would have thought that having 5 surrogate-sourced children themselves, would have been sufficient advertising for the efficacy of the services they offer.

Government and the courts will soon find themselves persecuting a minority.  In this case, the minority are the remaining practicing Christians in the England and Wales.  I seriously doubt that any homosexual Muslims will be seeking to risk a fatwa or worse, by rushing down to the local mosque for a 'traditional wedding'.  So no, it will be Christian churches that will be attacked and punished.

This whole legislation was not required.  Homosexuals, correctly, had equal rights under law for all of the things that matter but the liberal, metropolitan elite, which, being so politically correct actually end up being illiberal, wanted to push this and keep pushing it.   For activists like the  Drewitt-Barlow's the protection of minorities only extends to homosexuals

I guess that this now has the potential to pose the situation where Her Majesty's government goes to court against the Church of England (Head - Her Majesty) to force the CofE to conduct ceremonies that they were categorically told and promised they would not have to conduct.  Many people commented at the time, that it was to be expected that the legislation would be challenged.  Equally, many posited that if the legislation went to the European Court of Human Rights, then this illiberal and politically correct institution would rule the legislation as discriminatory.  And you can bet that when they do, it won't take them years and years, as it did in the case of Abu Qatada - this further attack on the status quo will be fast-tracked through the courts - what better way to show the British who really runs the country?
 


No comments:

Post a Comment