From a Roman Catholic blogger
At this stage in the battle to defend marriage, we would do well to learn the media strategy of the liberal elite who wish to change the law in the United Kingdom and re-define marriage in this country. Tom Chivers's latest effort helps us to see the arguments being employed in favour of the redefinition of marriage by the State.
1. Normalisation of civil partnerships and blurring the lines with marriage: This arrangement is perfectly normal – it is not a fringe event in society. Indeed, Tom uses the presumptuous language of marriage even though 'gay marriage' has not yet been introduced by the State ('The two brides looked gorgeous in white'.)
2. The personal touch: Tom's lesbian friends had a civil partnership. It was a lovely day, but he's saddened on his friends' behalf because they aren't properly married. Everyone feel sorry for the two ladies who can't get married. Their love isn't properly recognised by the State because they're not married in the same ways as heterosexual folk. It was painful that they couldn't say they were married. Why is it that Tom says he was saddened, but does not say that they were saddened. Tom says, ' It's the language of contract law. It made me both sad and furious.' Anyone would have thought this civil partnership was about him. If they were saddened, he would surely say so, no? Still, saddened they may be, but do we make law on what different people think will make different people happy? Or, do we order it for the good of society? The State doesn't allow thieves to grab what they want from Curry's either, even though they want the plasma TV screens but perhaps cannot afford them. I want goose at Christmas but can't afford it. Poor me. Change the law to allow me too cook my goose though some would argue I'm doing that now. Oh, 'but gay marriage is different to theft'. No, no it isn't. Gay marriage is theft. Marriage belongs to man and woman. What the gay community cannot obtain naturally by virtue of the condition of homosexuality, they wish to acquire by robbery.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.