(CEN) Andrew Carey–Redefining what marriage means

When legislation creating civil partnerships was passing through Parliament the government was at pains to give reassurances that these were distinct from marriage. They undoubtedly righted an injustice that many dependent couples, not married, could face great hardship when partners died or were ill. Yet because they were limited to same-sex partners, rather than maiden aunts and siblings, they were a nod in the direction of a quasi-homosexual marriage. This was confirmed later when a Home Office press release, announcing the date on which the legislation would become law, stated that wedding bells would be ringing for
same-sex couples.

And now by allowing religious elements to be incorporated into civil partnerships in contrast it is clear that the government is pushing these civil partnerships to their limits as a form of marriage between homosexuals. And there is absolutely no doubt that the remaining distinctions between civil partnerships and matrimony, despite the usual empty government reassurances, will be tested in the years ahead. Firstly, when the dust has settled a legal test case will be brought against a church which has opted out of allowing a gay couple to use their premises for a civil partnership.

But whether or not such a case wins or loses, the pressure is already building for gay civil marriage, which will eventually become gay religious marriage. And before we know it, what was permissive will become coercive and compulsory.

Read it all.


Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, * Culture-Watch, * International News & Commentary, --Civil Unions & Partnerships, Anglican Provinces, Anthropology, Church of England (CoE), England / UK, Ethics / Moral Theology, Law & Legal Issues, Marriage & Family, Religion & Culture, Sexuality, Theology

2 comments on “(CEN) Andrew Carey–Redefining what marriage means

  1. Larry Morse says:

    All true, all true, as sure as the sparks fly upward. But Why? Why? Why are all the battles going one way? Why is the government so set on winning this battle? Why is there so Little opposition? Is it the case that the Brits simply don’t care enough one way or another, or that homosexuality has become a mandatory cultural shibboleth – if that’s the word I want. This is not simply a political gambit, but a declaration of war. But why?
    I mentioned this before, but why does no Brit seem to think about it, the first principle stated in the Magna Carta granting churches their complete independence? Larry

  2. magnolia says:

    yah, well what ya going to do about it? the people over there obviously don’t care enough about it to do anything…it’s a sad state of affairs over there from what i read. bad morale and rampant cynicism; personally i think it rises from not winning WWII on their own but it may have started before then.