SPCS

SOCIETY FOR PROMOTION OF COMMUNITY STANDARDS INC.

Gay dads set to sue over church same-sex marriage opt-out – Essex Chronicle

by Leave a Comment

BARRIE Drewitt-Barlow, one half of the county’s most recognised gay dads, has praised the Queen’s ratification of gay marriage but said it is “bitter sweet” as Christian churches still opt against the ceremony.

Britain finally legalised gay marriage when the Queen gave her royal stamp of approval on July 17 after the bill was introduced in January.

“It is like someone giving me a sweetie with the wrapper on and telling me to suck it,” said father-of-five, Barrie, 42, from Maldon, who had a civil partnership with partner Tony, in 2006

“I [Barrie] want to go into my church and marry my husband [Tony]….. We have a civil partnership, me and my husband Tony … The only way forward for us now is to make a challenge in the courts against the church.” said Barrie Drewitt-Barlow.

For full story by Sophia Charalambous, Friday, August 02, 2013

See: http://www.essexchronicle.co.uk/Gay-dads-set-sue-church-sex-marriage-opt/story-19597954-detail/story.html

Church of England to be Sued for Refusing to Perform Same-Sex Marriages, Just a Month After PM Promised Protection

by Leave a Comment

A gay couple in Great Britain has announced plans to pursue legal action against the Church of England for refusing to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies, less than one month after the country officially legalized gay marriage, but explicitly excluded the Church from being forced to conduct the ceremonies as they go against biblical teachings.

Barrie Drewitt-Barlow and his partner, Tony, have been considered by many in Great Britain to be the “poster couple” for same-sex marriage legalization, as they became the first gay parents in 1999 through surrogacy, and have since had five other children through surrogacy. The couple had a civil partnership ceremony in 2006, and own a surrogate center in Chandlers Quay, Maldon.

The gay marriage legislation approved in Great Britain earlier this year, known as the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013, included a “quadruple lock” meant to protect the Church of England and other religious institutions from being forced to perform same-sex marriages against their faith. Under the current law, churches may “opt-in” to perform same-sex marriages, but they cannot be forced to conduct ceremonies.

Despite that highly-publicized safeguard being included in the legislation, many critics believed that gay activists would ignore that exclusion and continue to push for churches to be forced to participate in gay marriage ceremonies against their will. Now just weeks after the legislation was passed, it appears those fears were well-founded; Drewitt-Barlow and his partner argue that they wish to “test” this protection in court. The couple have claimed that they are practicing Christians and they want their children to see them wed in a church ceremony.

Read more at http://global.christianpost.com/news/church-of-england-to-be-sued-for-refusing-to-perform-same-sex-marriages-just-a-month-after-prime-minister-promised-protection-101487/#PigwvlY2lySIywiD.99

Australian pro “gay” ‘marriage’ lobbyists oppose referendum

by Leave a Comment

Rodney Croome, national director of Australian Marriage Equality – a pro-same-sex ‘marriage’ lobby group – is reported in The Age to be opposed to a referendum being held to determine whether or not same-sex ‘marriages’ should be legalized. Croome, a Tasmania-based Australian LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) rights activist and academic says:

Overseas referenda on marriage equality have been exploited by cashed-up, anti-gay groups to conduct fear and hate campaigns against gay people.

We know from US research that in states where there have been marriage equality referenda there is an increase in the level of anxiety, depression and suicide among gay and lesbian people.

The people who suffer the most are young gay people coming to terms with their sexuality.

An Australian referendum would give anti-gay stalwarts such as Fred Nile the biggest megaphone they have ever had.

This is why anti-equality groups are usually the ones calling for a referendum.

Another big problem is confusion about what’s being proposed.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/why-a-referendum-on-gay-marriage-is-a-bad-idea-20130429-2inuh.html#ixzz2RqRU2K00

Comment: Croome asserts that anyone who dares to express any opposition to “gay marriage” is “anti-gay” by definition and will “conduct fear and hate campaigns against gay people” motivated by their hatred of “gays”. This reasoning is absurd. It is logically flawed, false and is incessantly repeated by leading “gay” rights campaigners around the world.

Leading Christian philopsopher Dr William Lane Craig has addressed the fallacy inherent in this type of ‘reasoning’ when he states:

“It occurs to me that if my thinking that homosexual acts are immoral means that I hate homosexual people, then it follows that I must also hate all single people, since I think that pre-marital sex is wrong. Surely such an accusation is patently absurd.”

Many oppose “gay” or same-sex ‘marriage’ (SSM) for reasons that are not in any way connected with a belief that homosexual acts are wrong. They believe traditional marriage is a foundational institution of civil society and has been universally understood to involve a man and a woman in an exclusive relationship. This definition holds true irrespective of what people believe about the morality of homosexual acts between consenting adults.  Many practising homosexuals opposes “gay” marriage and want nothing to do with an institution that they consider archaic, patriarchal and a hinderance to their sexual practices and lifestyle.

It is a logical absurdity for anyone, let alone an academic who should know better, to claim that if a person opposes SSM that means they hate “gay” people. It is an obvious non sequitur i.e. it is an inference or conclusion that does not follow from the premises or evidence.

Take-up of unpopular “gay” ‘marriage’ by French “gays” likely to be below 5,000 p.a.

by Leave a Comment

The Economist reports that only a very tiny number of “gay” couples are likely to get ‘married’ in France (<5,000 per year) despite claims by jubilant advocates of “gay” ‘marriage’ that securing the “rights” to get ‘married’ will make a huge difference to their lives. The reality is that it is a highly unpopular institution among LGBTIAQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transexual/transgender, intersex, asexual, queer) communities, most of whom consider it largely irrelevant and meaningless. The estimated 1.4 million opponents of the bill to legalise same-sex ‘marriage’ who protested in Paris in March, are currently being urged to attend another march, on May 26th, to try to force the government to back down even though the law has passed. They know that advocating “marriage equality” and “gay” adoption, is primarily focused at “normalising” homosexual lifestyle with the result that children are discriminated against (children adopted by “gays” are denied the right to have both a father and a mother). 

“IT WAS a moment of jubilation for some, consternation for others. After 136 hours of riotous parliamentary debate and months of demonstrations by opponents and advocates, French deputies voted on April 23rd to legalise gay marriage and adoption. The measure should be on the statute books by June, making France the 14th country to approve it. But the critics have not given up and are appealing to the Constitutional Council to reject the law……

“In reality, few people are likely to take advantage of the new law. In Spain, which legalised gay marriage in 2005, same-sex marriages represent only 2% of the total. Applied to France, this would suggest fewer than 5,000 gay marriages a year. Under French law, marriage confers firmer rights, particularly over inheritance, than the civil pacts that have long been open to same-sex partners. The irony is that, for heterosexual couples, such pacts are now nearly twice as popular as the increasingly unfashionable institution of marriage.”

The Economist. April 27th 2013

http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21576692-frances-parliament-votes-legalise-gay-marriage-and-adoption-rainbow-warriors

Mike Butler: The gay-marriage self-parody

by Leave a Comment

The phrase “gay rights for nuclear-free whales” quite accurately parodies the shallow, trendy, bumper-sticker campaigns of the New Zealand left. Shallow trendiness dominated parliament this week as Labour MP Louisa Wall’s Marriage (Definition of Marriage Bill) Amendment Bill passed its third reading 77 votes to 44.

Customs Minister Maurice Williamson promised the sky would not cave in, which was obvious since figures from New Zealand’s 2006 census show that same-sex couples make up fewer than 1 percent of all couples in New Zealand. The numbers of homosexual men living together reached 0.3 percent in 2006, while the number of homosexual women cohabiting made up 0.4 percent of all couples living together.

A total of 3516 female couples and 2655 male couples lived together in 2006, compared with 867,696 couples of the opposite sex. In 2011, of all homosexual couples living together, 232 couples entered into a civil union, with 133 of them women.

To what extent did this shallow, trendy, bumper-sticker campaign clog up parliament? Some indication came from the time it took for MPs to reply to the email I sent to all on August 28 last year. Labour MP Lianne Dalziel replied in March this year while National MP Nicky Wagner replied on April 16.

For full report go to:

http://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.co.nz/2013/04/mike-butler-gay-marriage-self-parody.html?m=0