….not all relationships are the same. Those who are currently proposing to extend the understanding of marriage to include same sex partnership are doing so in the name of equality. Even if they acknowledge that they are doing something quite unprecedented, they believe they have the moral right to do so and the assent of the people.
In my view this is mistaken. This change assumes that marriage is simply a civil rite of passage which the State in its wisdom can change if it so wishes. Of course, if we take this point of view, it is entirely rational to do so on the basis that, if homosexual relationships are the same as marital partnerships, then nothing fundamental is being changed at all.
Marriage, however, cannot be defined as simply as the government supposes.
What then is marriage? I have already used the word ”˜unprecedented’ of the Government’s desire to extend marriage to Civil Partnerships. And it is because marriage has ALWAYS been understood as a heterosexual relationship binding a man and a woman is an exclusive and life-long commitment….