‘POLICY EXCHANGE’ REPORT - SAME SEX MARRIAGE.
AN OPEN LETTER TO COALITION MPs.
Civil Partnerships. [Part 3]
A serious weakness in the arguments put forward for
homosexual "marriage" by the authors of the Policy Exchange report,
much of which purports to support the institution of marriage, can be fully
applied to the terms of Civil Partnerships, including the claim of “equality
before the law”. As many opponents of homosexual "marriage" have
pointed out, there is virtually little legal difference between Civil
Partnerships and normal marriage so there is no need to re-define marriage to
include them. CPs “confer the benefits of marriage in all but name”.
One of these differences between CP’s and marriage it is claimed,
“is that the former can be a purely legal agreement, whereas a marriage must
involve an exchange of vows”. But that invites the obvious retort that there is
nothing to prevent partners in CP’s making or exchanging such vows if they
wish. It is rightly said then that marriage and CPs have been designed for two
very different types of relationship and should be kept distinct.
This being the case we must look elsewhere for the
underlying push for homosexual "marriage", and the fanatical zeal by
the many various homosexual lobbyists in agitating for a change in the law. Policy
Exchange appears to confirm what others have already said, namely that
homosexuals are looking for a greater measure of acceptance within society, and
specifically for their homosexual acts to find acceptance and legitimacy in
‘marriage’ which CP does not provide.
For example the report states: “Equal marriage would be an
important and decisive step to fully integrating gay and lesbian people as
members of a society.”
So a change in the law would entrench that perceived
legitimacy, and would be an important first step towards acceptance by the
general public of a much wider homosexual ethos. Thus a progression from CP’s
to ‘marriage’ would indeed change our understanding of what marriage is, and
would radically re-define it for all of us, and some of which, it is feared,
will have severely damaging consequences.
No comments:
Post a Comment