 |
| Stonewall's Rings of Fire |
Firstly, Her Majesty the Queen, not to be confused with any old queen, will take credit for this if it becomes English law. Every law credits the Monarch, obviously, but I thought it was worthwhile mentioning that the Defender of the Anglican Faith is being asked to hammer in the final nail into the coffin of British Christianity (though I'm not denying its potential Resurrection).
The Bill aims to...
'Make provision for and in connection with extending the legal form of marriage to same-sex couples in England and Wales.
Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows: -
1 Marriage between persons of the same sex
(1) Amend the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 as follows.
(2) In section 2 (Supplemental provisions as to facts raising presumption of breakdown), in subsection (6) for “a husband and wife” substitute “parties to a marriage”.
(3) In section 11 (Grounds on which a marriage is void), in subsection (b) after “lawfully married or a civil partner” insert “subject to subsection (e)”.
(4) In section 11 (Grounds on which a marriage is void) omit subsection (c).'
May God defend Her Majesty, for she will have to take a big breath before signing this, because HRH the Queen will basically be enshrining into law that which St Paul explicitly condemns. From that day forth, this will no longer be a 'Christian country', no matter what our Monarch may believe. Could this really happen in a Christian country? No. But it could happen in a country which doesn't give a fig what Christ thinks about anything - even marriage - and that's where we're living now.
The second interesting bit is that part in Section 2 of the Matrimonial Causes Act,that will have to be changed for gay marriage to go through, inserting for “a husband and wife”, instead, "parties to a marriage”. Bye, bye 'husbands and wives'. Hello, 'parties to a marriage'. Anyone would have thought that to the Stonewall pressure group the phrase 'husbands and wives' was embarrassing, unhealthy, or downright unnatural, but the simple truth of the matter is that 'husbands and wives' must be eliminated from this section (for a start) of the Martimonial Causes Act, otherwise the gay marriage agenda lacks credibility. Sorry to see you go 'husbands and wives'. Sorry to see you 'banned' from the Matrimonial Causes Act, but when you want to implement that which has no legitimate basis in reason, then certain words and institutions have to be sacrificed. Namely...marriage. In no way will 'gay marriage' undermine traditional marriage. Let's just get the tippex out and get rid of 'husbands and wives'...Heterosexual love, the love that dare not speak its name...
Do read the rest. Here.
 |
| Stonewall's campaign cards: Perfect for gran... |
Okay...one question. Where are our postcards, my Lords? This is the problem. We're always about five miles behind our enemies. It is no wonder they know what's at the end of the road, but we do not.
By all means, if you have Photoshop, send in your pro-natural marriage postcards to my email account and I'll stick them up. Then we can send them to the Bishops to be sent to all and sundry, to be sent to David Cameron by the Faithful.
We need slogans.
'God made Adam and Eve, not...'
No, that would get banned by Trevor. What about:
'Say No to Artificial Marriage and Contraception While You're At It (2 for the price of 1)'
or
'The State Owns Neither Marriage Nor Our Asses'
or
'Only One Love Can Create Children'.
Hmm...tricky isn't it...I hate negative advertising...What about:
'Let's Just Get A Few Things Straight About Marriage'
or
'Don't fall into a burning ring of fire. Marry like Johnny Cash married. Except do it once.'
'2 become 1 because they're different figures.'
Anyway, these are just preliminary ideas. For extra campaign material to keep marriage from being corrupted irrevocably, see the Bishops Conference of England and Wales and click here.
4 comments:
Pakistani Matrimonial site allows only different sex marriage if you are interested then try.
This feels like an annual comment on all sort of different blog: first, there is a difference in the UK between "the Crown" and "the Monarch" and second, the Queen does not sign anything to give Royal Assent. It is given verbally in the House of Lords by an officer of the House. The nearest she comes to the legislative process is the reading of the Queen's Speech.
Understood, but it is still being done in the name of Her Majesty.
All the political responses of the Church to this sort of creeping de-Christianization of our society seem ad hoc. For example, even though the Scottish bishops did give an extremely firm response to the same sex 'marriage' proposals in Scotland (together with a postcard campaign), it seemed very much a reaction to the well-oiled 'Equal Marriage' machine, which is still purring on regardless while the consultation responses are being considered (demos, lobbying and the like) whilst the Christian response has gone quiet.
I'd like to see more thought given to the possibility of a longer term strategy of resistance, in particular, building a coalition across different religious groups and developing a harder edged marketing strategy on family and ethical issues. We are in a culture war and we need to start in an appropriate way.
Post a Comment