Gay and lesbian politics isn’t one of my central interests. Quite honestly I don’t care what people get up to under the sheets, so long as nobody gets hurt. But the idea of legalising gay marriage seems to me to be an attempt to re-define what the word “marriage” means. And it’s probably the thin end of the wedge, as Norman Tebbit pointed out:
All that, however, seems to be small beer beside Mr Cameron’s determination and haste to legislate for the end of marriage as we have known it for the last five or ten thousand years. No longer would it be a union of one man and one woman. Initially Mr Cameron would make it into a union of any two persons (with the exception of those barred by consanguinity I assume). I doubt if it would remain there. Why should not brothers, or sisters be prevented from “marrying”? Or a mother and daughter or father and son? Already in “liberal” circles in America the zoophilliacs are pressing their case for the legalisation of human sex with animals.
And now the Catholic Church has joined in as well:
In one of the biggest joint letters of its type ever written, they raise fears that their freedom to practise and speak about their faith will be “severely” limited and dismiss Government reassurances as “meaningless”.
They even liken David Cameron’s moves to redefine marriage to those of Henry VIII, whose efforts to secure a divorce from Katherine of Aragon triggered centuries of bloody upheaval between church and state.
They claim that, taken in combination with equalities laws and other legal restraints, the Coalition’s plans will prevent Catholics and other Christians who work in schools, charities and other public bodies speaking freely about their beliefs on the meaning of marriage.
Even the freedom to speak from the pulpit could be under threat, they claim.
And they fear that Christians who believe in the traditional meaning of marriage would effectively be excluded from some jobs – just as Catholics were barred from many professions from the Reformation until the 19th Century.
The comments are contained in a letter to The Daily Telegraph, signed by 1,054 priests as well as 13 bishops, abbots and other senior Catholic figures.
They account for almost a quarter of all Catholic priests in England and Wales.
I wish a few of them had stood up and said that for Britain’s 10 million+ persecuted smokers, many of whom are already being barred from employment.
And why does anyone believe that David Cameron is a “Conservative”, when quite obviously he isn’t. Nobody but a dangerous radical would have proposed such a measure, and that is what he is.
But I don’t think that this has got anything to do with gay and lesbian rights, any more than smoking bans have got anything to do with ‘health’, really. What these people are doing is dismantling a culture, piece by piece.
The smoking ban is part of a process of dismantling the ancient cultural institution of the English tavern. The next step, of course, will be to restrict and then ban alcohol. That will kill the pubs stone dead. And that is, I believe, the primary aim of these dangerous radicals.
The same goes for legalising gay marriage. It’s really just an attack on the institution of marriage. It’s simply another institution that they want to demolish.
And then there’s the EU ‘project’, which is an attack on the institution of the sovereign state with its own elected parliaments.
And it might be added that the global warming scare is a cover under which to launch an attack on the entire institutionalised energy structures and economic foundations of Western society, as well as an assault upon scientific integrity.
All of it is sheer vandalism. But unlike the petty vandalism of street delinquents at the bottom of society, this is vandalism being carried out by people at the very top of society – like the British Prime Minister, David Cameron.
It’s the cultural equivalent of 9/11. This isn’t about demolishing an iconic building and killing thousands, but demolishing an entire culture, and killing millions.
But it’s being carried out piecemeal, in the same way that smoking bans were introduced little by little, in piecemeal steps. And it’s being done this way because they don’t want the people to become alarmed at what is being done to them. They want them to keep on thinking that everything is normal, even when everything is becoming more and more abnormal and twisted and sick. The one thing they don’t want is for people to put two and two together, and realise what’s happening.
I don’t know why the Conservative party has someone like David Cameron as a leader, when he quite obviously isn’t a Conservative. It’s a bit like the Catholic church having a Pope who isn’t a Catholic. Any illusions they may have had about him, with his Eton education, should have all been swept away by now. Or have they all been tied up and gagged in the cellars beneath the Houses of Parliament?