Confusion about marriage

12 April 2011

It seems that many politicians are confused about marriage.  It may be something to do with their education.

The Scottish Labour Manifesto mentions the word ‘marriage’ once, “to consult on options to provide genuine equality for same-sex couples and their families, by addressing the different status of civil partnership and marriage.”  The Party says “the time is now” to consult on “options” for radically redefining marriage to allow homosexual couples to marry.

This unholy social experiment continues to unravel the fabric of our society and exposes the spinelessness of our politicians.  This is no consultation.  Such weasel words do not even begin to hide the destination at which they want the consultation exercise to arrive.  What is the motivation?  “We are clear – Scotland shouldn’t be left behind on these issues.”  Behind who?  This is the same as a teenage fear of one’s peer group, but it is not good enough for one of the greatest social upheavals of our generation.

The Scottish Liberal Democrats are not so unsure.  They don’t need to consult.  They have given their full support to homosexual marriage. In addition, the party wants to allow heterosexual civil partnerships.  According to their Manifesto they want to “extend legal marriage to gay couples and civil partnerships to heterosexual couples.”  The problem is that this re-defines marriage without so much as a “by your leave”, and their civil partnership extension does not include spinster sisters living together.  Why should civil partnership have any sexual element in it at all?

This is typical of the top-down dogmatic imposition of solutions we have become used to from this ConDem alliance.  As for civil partnerships for heterosexual couples - this looks like a desperate attempt to be ‘fair and equal’.  When will they learn that equality can only be between equals - it cannot be simply decreed.  The Lib Dems are careful about the wording of their schools policy: “We will find new ways of challenging homophobia in schools…”  What are these new ways?  Some media commentators have asserted that “The Scottish Liberal Democrats have demanded in their manifesto that gay issues be taught in schools.

teacher training pack produced by Stonewall, Britain’s top homosexual lobby group, has been sent to primary schools.  Richard Dawkins asserts that Christian parents teaching Christianity to their children is child abuse, but this incessant drive to sexualise primary school children is considered by mainline political parties to be acceptable policy.

The Green Party has long campaigned to “open up civil marriages and civil partnerships, without discrimination, to both same-sex and opposite-sex couples”.  Its
Manifesto is quite plain about the matter.  Christians need to note that a Green vote contains the Pink vote, and the Greens are spear-heading the Pink agenda.

The Tories duck the issue in their Scottish Manifesto but David Cameron’s opinion has silenced the Conservative voice for Clause 28, the law prohibiting the promotion of homosexuality in schools.  This spineless abdication of responsibility is a singular failure of leadership on the things that matter.  Long after the economic crisis is past, we will be left with the legacy of immorality pushed forward by the Cameron government.  Tony Blair wanted a legacy and got the Iraq War.  David Cameron’s legacy will be the shameful sell-out of Christianity in Britain - and for what reason?  To satisfy the urges of a dogmatic young man?

The SNP Manifesto pledges to “begin a process of consultation and discussion on these issues.”  The SNP are well ahead in the polls, so the Party most likely to form the next Scottish Government has promised the platform to the homosexual lobby, backed by the leaden hand of the Thought Police.

This is likely to be one of the defining issues of the next Parliament.  Where will be the voice for Christian values in the Scottish Parliament?

It is time for Christians to vote Christian.  Put your cross by the Cross.