‘POLICY EXCHANGE’ REPORT - SAME SEX MARRIAGE.
AN OPEN LETTER TO COALITION MPs.
Conclusion. [Part 7]
The central issue in the current debate is not as suggested
by Policy Exchange that: “The benefits of marriage are clear and proven” (for
that is a given as most would agree), but rather how do the authors define the
concept of marriage? Since announcement of the government’s proposals many
Christians have consistently presented a case for traditional marriage and
argued it clearly and logically, based on principle, and often in considerable depth,
whilst some contributing commentators are outstanding. They continue to ‘speak
truth to power’. (see References below for particular recommendations) (6).
Aside from the think tank survey’s attempt to commend
homosexual "marriage", a reasoned Conservative/Coalition rationale
justifying it is virtually non-existent. Where the policy is presented by
Ministers it is inadequate, shallow, and lacking intellectual and moral
integrity. They simply have not made the case for a change in the law on
marriage.
Notwithstanding coming Parliamentary debates on the issue it
must be asked why the government so signally failed to present a wider
discussion and debate on such an important issue over a reasonable period of
time. To its shame, the government’s public on line ‘consultation’ exercise has
already been exposed as disingenuous, if not actually dishonest, as it failed
to allow the public a discussion on the basic principle as to why legalising
homosexual "marriage" should proceed.
It is not good enough for our Prime Minister to
simplistically announce the policy “because I’m a Conservative”. That is a
statement not a reason!
Likewise for the new Culture Secretary, Mrs Maria Miller’s
purported justification of homosexual "marriage". Her patronising and vacuous short video on behalf of
‘Out4marriage’ with its emphasis on “equal marriage”, was an embarrassingly
incoherent presentation which did nothing to elucidate government policy. For a
Minister concerned with ‘culture’ she seemed unaware that SSM degrades the very
concept, and is an attack upon one of the foundational elements binding society
together (7).
For over 600,000 people (8) who have signed the Coalition for
Marriage petition supporting traditional marriage these threadbare
contributions for a full and meaningful debate on their own policy seem to
indicate more incompetence, if not arrogance, on the part of Ministers.
Let us hope therefore that MPs will demonstrate rather more
moral backbone and intellectual vigour than Ministers when this unnecessary
debate takes place in Parliament. Westminster
should follow the fine moral and spiritual lead shown by both the Northern Ireland
Assembly and Australian Parliament in their recent rejection of moves to
legalise homosexual "marriage".
REFERENCES
REFERENCES
6. Outstanding articles and comment on SSM and related issues archived at the following web sites:
www.anglican-mainstream.net www.billmuehlenberg.com
7. http://www.out4marriage.org/
8. c4m.org.uk
No comments:
Post a Comment