The Scottish Government has started a consultation with the intention of legalising same-sex marriage on the same day as a Conservative MP called for churches to be banned from celebrating marriages at all if they banned similar services for gays.
The Scottish consultation (find it HERE), ‘The Registration of Civil Partnerships / Same-Sex Marriage – A Consultation’, ends on 9th December.
The SNP government has already prejudiced the consultation. In the introduction to the paper, deputy first minister Nicola Sturgeon, says: “The Scottish government is choosing to make its initial views clear at the outset of this consultation.
“We tend towards the view that religious ceremonies for civil partnerships should no longer be prohibited and that same sex marriage should be introduced so that same sex couples have the option of getting married if that is how they wish to demonstrate their commitment to each other.
“We also believe that no religious body or its celebrants should be required to carry out same sex marriages or civil partnership ceremonies.”
The proposals come just as the Scottish Social Attitudes Survey has disclosed that the proportion of Scots thinking that homosexuals have the right to ‘marry’ has increased from 41% in 2002 to 61% in 2010. The proportion disagreeing has gone down from 29% to 19% over the same period.
Attitude has followed the law. The authors observe: ‘Much of this shift in attitudes has occurred during the last five years – that is, since the introduction of civil partnerships in December 2005, which thus appears to have had a considerable impact on attitudes.’
In response, we should say, firstly, that allowing such ceremonies to take place in church would allow homosexual activists their first step to having the Church honour their distorted relationships. Respect from the Church is one of only two measures missing for them, their having won everything else.
(The other missing link in the gay rights chain is a full hate-crimes law to forbid adverse comment on their activities and lifestyle. Under ‘hate-crimes’, Section 74 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 extended hate-crimes legislation in the United Kingdom to homosexuality, but a ‘freedom of expression’ clause inserted against the UK Governments’ wishes allowed ‘discussion or criticism of sexual conduct or practices, or the urging of persons to refrain from or modify such conduct or practices.’)
Secondly, it is easy to say at this point that religious bodies and ministers would not be forced to carry out same sex marriages or civil partnership ceremonies, but those behind the legislation (the civil servants and gay rights activists in the corridors of power, not necessarily the minister) will be back within a year or two calling on simple logic and the demands of equality to remove that concession.
And right on time to prove this very point, step forward the Conservative Member of Parliament for Hove, one Mike Weatherley. He has called for churches to be banned from holding marriages if they won’t also carry out civil partnerships for homosexuals.
Mr Weatherley’s constituency lies in Brighton and Hove which has the most same-sex households in the UK. In a letter to Prime Minister David Cameron, published today, he said:
‘Several campaigns are currently calling for, variously, the creation of a right to a Marriage for same-sex couples and the creation of a right to a Civil Partnership for opposite-sex couples. Such proposals may seemingly be the next logical step in the campaign for equality but, if enacted, would still leave us with a messy compromise. As long as religious groups can refuse to preside over ceremonies for same-sex couples, there will be inequality. Such behaviour is not be tolerated (sic) in other areas, such as adoption, after all.’
The UK Government, like its Scottish counterpart, is already preparing to bring forward legislation to allow civil partnerships to be conducted on religious premises, something specifically banned in the Civil Partnership Act 2004. This intention on its own shows how equality legislation advances by a Fabian process of creep.
Gay activists probably hope Mr Weatherley’s extreme intervention will shift the parameters of debate so that the UK Government’s proposal (and for that matter that of the Scottish Parliament) looks reasonable. But instead he has let the cat out of the bag, and shown us what will be done if not under this adminstration then when Labour return to power.
PRAY: Thank God for revealing the true intentions of the anti-Christian homosexual movement and pray that the churches will take note and arise to tell the governments north and south of the border that we will not accept this attack on the Church of Jesus Christ, that no-one has the authority to over-ride what God has stated in Scripture.
READ: Mark 10:6 (Jesus answered: …) But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. 7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; 8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
Romans 1 : 24……26-27. God abandoned them.
We are in the last days, in all respects. I wonder therefore, whether we should even bother protesting this abomination? These people are blind and deaf. perhaps we should just be preaching the gospel of repentance ( Jonah & Nineveh ) and leave the rest to God. Sodom & Gomorrah ?
Stephen,
Yet another plank in advance of ‘political correctness’ – common sense is clealry long dead. One passing thought, I wonder if passed, would such legislation be applied equally to both Christian and Islamic religious places. Somehow I suspect not. No one would want to offend the beliefs and practices of our Islamic neighbours… whereas Christian concerns about the advancing de-Christianisation of the UK no longer seem to matter.
For many years the trend in British politics has been for permissive legislation first, followed by coercive legislation.
Militant homopervuals will have their way and cause further destruction in the church and in British society unless something major is done to stop them. Militant homopervuals cannot be allowed to corrupt the marriage institution. Christians must present the truth on this issue to the nation – speaking out loudly, clearly and with one voice.
Broken Britain is in a terrible enough condition as things presently are: marriage must be defended at all costs or the final irrevocable collapse of society will surely follow.
I’d say the homopervuals have a third key objective as yet unattained: overturning the blood ban.
It is not going to happen any time soon. Legislators could not discriminate between Islam and Christianity and get away with it and they are far too sensitive to Islam to attempt to enforce this. There are also many ‘Christians’ who fail to see any problem in this proposal, it already goes on privately in some churches in the UK and publicly, of course, amongst US Episcopalians and other denominations.
I do not think it helps by calling them ” Gay Marriages”. Why corrupt good words by an evil practice: they should be called “sodomite ????”
Gay marriage is just one more step Britain is making away from God. Research indicates that government legislation has led Britain away from God and biblical principles since the mid 20th century. This has been greatly aided by humanistic law (directives) from the EU. The result has been progressive spiritual, moral, social and economic decline over the past 60 years. The political correctness of the institutionalised church has done nothing to help.
The Bible is clear that when a nation like Britain deliberately turns its back on God then that nation will be judged by God, irrespective of government efforts to correct things using humanistic methods. In fact, what is happening to Britain closely parallels the judgements in Deut 28.. For a full discussion on this, and a way out, see http://www.seekingtruth.co.uk/britain.pdf .
I fear very much for the future of our once great nation. God made it clear to the Israelites not to mix with the surrounding pagan countries, knowing that their influence would take them away from the one true God – which it often did and they paid a high price for it.
While many immigrants have been a blessing, it is clear that letting so many in with different religions and beliefs, it has had a damaging effect on our nation – none more so than mixed marriages or no marriage, and now same sex marriages. Hence the reason why Christianity and all it stands for, is literally being phased out, aided by many who think they are Chrisitans, and are being very loving and tolerant towards these people.
However, I do wince when I read the insulting comments made by some Christians, and feel by that we are not obeying our Lord to “love our enemies”. Yes, I agree, it is hard!!
As the wife of a retired Baptist Minister and having been in the Ministry many years, I have never met anyone won for the Lord, by being insulted.
Thank you for bringing to our attention so many things that are going on, which we don’t always hear about.
God bless,
Pat Finch
Thanks, Pat. As the book of Jude says (v22-23): ‘On some have compassion, making a difference, and others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire’. But nothing there about saving with insults, one must agree!
There is such a lot we can say about this as Christians. We can take our stand; and it’s right that we should. We can quote many scriptures; and we do that. In the end though it is God’s love that brings people to repentance and who else is there to show this but Christians. The fight for equality will never end in equality of any kind, because their success will rob us of our rights.
God does not persecute men. Men persecute men. But God does judge men and this is the message we should be sharing with homosexuals. They have made their choice to live that lifestyle without any consideration of God, because they don’t know Him or believe in Him. They are entitled to live their lives as they choose. But, just because they may one day be granted the right to ‘marry’ in Church does not mean they are married in the Biblical sense. It is just geography. Bible believing Christian people could be married in a farmyard and would still be married before God. Homosexual people may one day be allowed to stand before the altar in Westminster Abbey and speak words, even Biblical words, to each other; but they will not be married as far as God, who ordained it, is concerned. They will just be hijacking the word; and that’s just semantics.
Marriage is a holy, spiritual union that homosexual couples will never attain before God. It isn’t the pomp and ceremony. God doesn’t give two hoots about that, but it is exactly that part of it all that the homosexuals want to have. And that is just theatrics. Is it such a lot different to a heterosexual couple marrying in Church that have never set foot in one before, or for whom the name of God is usually just a swear word?
Yes, as Christians we should indeed make a stand against the law being changed to allow this; particularly the Clergy should. If they are true servants of God they should refuse to do this. But we know that in spite of everything Jesus Christ is building His Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And we all know that “His Church” does not refer to a building, right?
Yes, it is an outrage; but it isn’t the end of the world…….yet. But the Lord Jesus Christ could be returning any time now and that is what should spur us into action most of all.
Dear Judy,
I believe it can get a lot worse yet, and what is different about solemnising the homosexual pairing is that Jesus Christ made clear in Mark 10:6-8 that only a man and a woman marry in the purpose of God. From the earliest time that ‘leaving of father and mother’ and the starting of a new family has involved some kind of public ceremony, as if to say that the community does indeed have an interest in marriage, that it is a public declaration of a holy commitment.
I note you are very quick to pass judgement on homosexuals but I would be interested to hear your postion on divorce and re-marriage. There is clear scriptural condemantion for the practice and yet it seems you have convieniently overlooked this in order to marry your second wife.
Further, it seems that your websites, blogs and general railing is more to do with serving your ego than God.
Amaze me and publish this comment, including the link to the article.
No-fault divorce on demand has wreaked havoc with family life and the consequences are daily being visited on us, particularly on working people in estates which have become war-zones. As one who has been on the receiving end of it I sympathise with the plight of those who unwillingly find themselves cast off in this way and would like to help them. The Bible is after all quite clear that the innocent party in a divorce may remarry and God has after all called us to fellowship and family. Go see Gen 2:18, 18:25; Deut 24:1-2; Psalm 68:6; 1Cor 7:15. I probably need to write at greater length on this because many dear folk may be denying themselves the fellowship of marriage in this lawless, covenant-breaking generation from a misreading of the Scriptures.
As to the article to which I imagine you refer, no, this site does not print or link to libel and slander, and a denial of the article was published HERE when it came out.
Mark 10, 11-12 is pretty clear on the matter. I may be incorrect but I do seem to recall you took precisely this position when Prince Charles married his current wife.
Let me make it clear, I am in no way passing judgement on you for getting divorced and then remarrying; just commenting on the irony, or perhaps even hypocrisy, that you should do so given the Saviour’s categorical prohibition and then demonise the committed relationships of homosexuals.
Personally I find your attitude and references to homosexuals deeply offensive and un-Christ like. Do you and the likes of Richard Carvath find people are willing to listen to any witness which is preached by people who use such utterly degrading language as you are both inclined to do so? Are you winning souls for Christ or alienating them from Him message? Think on…..
In Mark 10, the Lord specifically addresses the Hillel position on divorce, which allowed it for any reason, and in that context prohibits a man who puts away his wife and a woman who puts away her husband from remarrying. I did not divorce my ex, so the Saviour’s prohibition does not apply to me or for that matter to any person unjustly divorced in this adulterous and sinful generation.
It remains that Mark 10 specifies that marriage is between a man and a women, because of what the Lord Jesus clearly understands as the creation ordinance. Homosexuals cannot be ‘one flesh’, to use His words, because a man cannot emotionally and sexually complement another man, nor a woman another woman. At a physical level they lack between them the parts of the anatomy required, which is why their sexual activities revolve around mutual masturbation or pressing into sexual service a part of the body perfectly designed for the extraction of water from bodily waste. It would be un-Christ-like and display a heart of stone to stand by approvingly whilst people made in the image of God not only sin but abuse theirs’ and others’ bodies in such a degrading way.
Ours at the Mardi Gras was a witness against evil, not friendship evangelism, in which Christians engage with unbelievers over a period of time. On a single afternoon there isn’t time for that. But people certainly listened to what we had to say and took our leaflets with their message of deliverance from homosexual desires. We had with us a young man delivered from the gay lifestyle by exactly that kind of preaching. A sower went forth to sow… So now you can think on!
Thanks for giving us details of what is being put forward to do with gay relationships;truley if God dose not judge Britain for getting rid of so many Christian Biblical Truths: He would have to say sorry for what He did to Sodom & Gammora.
Hi I would like to write a letter to my MP asking him to oppose these “gay” marriage laws, and also to the Scottish MP, but am not that good at writing letters or putting my points properly and succinctly – has anyone got any pointers please on the best way to word these things? I would be grateful for any help. Of course we should not all write in the same way, and we can put them into our own words, but some guidance would help on these things.
The Christian Institute often send out newsletters with tip on how to write, and what to say etc (they haven’t as yet with this). I find this sort of thing helps me enormously, and would probable help other Christians too, and then more of us would write. Thanks in anticipation 🙂
Hi Clare,
For the general rules, go to: https://www.christianvoice.org.uk/?p=1057
For this subject, Ask your MP to ask the appropriate minister to agree that civil partnerships should continue not to be permitted on religious premises and that marriage is and should remain the voluntary union of one man and one woman for life as at present.
There is no need to be long, and the longer your letter is, the more they can avoid your question!
Every blessing.
I understand that some CP’s have been ‘celebrated’ in Unitarian churches in the UK and that the Quakers are happy to do the same (though whether they have yet, I don’t know). Some CofE clergy have made it clear that they can’t wait to do so as well. The scriptures might as well have not been written for these ‘Christians’.
Statistics can be ‘made’ to say anything. Anyone who has looked at the awful (and very deliberately so by the Scottish government) complexity of getting your opinion counted by the SCOTTISH ASSEMBLY will know. The form is about 15 pages long, with a multitude of very obscure questions that are in any case open to subjective interpretation, with cross-references to various parts of the proposed bill (with no mention of what these parts are in the opinion form). Only a complete homosexual fighting desperately for some gay rights would have the where-with-all to fill the form in at all. No wonder the proportion of ayes is so rigged. They’ve probably only received 10 or so completed forms!
Do a survey by asking 20000 people randomly sampled in the streets, do they think gays should have the same rights as married couples, including a public commitment ceremony just a plain yes or no and if this should be called ‘marriage’ (which is by definition between a man and a woman!) and you might get a very different answer.
Ask them what they might think if an employer or someone else interpreted their being married as possibly being in a same sex relationship!
Perhaps some people think contrary to what happens in real life that if more gays settle down together, there’ll be less out on the streets. Ask most gays what they think and commitment means spending 5 minutes of lust with one same sex partner before looking for a different sex object, before going on to hundreds or thousands of other same sex ‘conquests’. Only a very small minority of gays are interested in any kind of longer lasting commitment.
Married means to all of us being married to an opposite sex partner, and no gay (or idiotic politician) is going to diminish or belittle this present meaning! If they want their own ‘partnerships’ let this not diminish from Marriage and the state of being married (i.e. male with female) in ANY way.
[…] Gay Marriage Threat Worsens […]