Bookmark and Share
Previous article

News Articles

  • Gay Marriage Brought Forward, But Why?
  • By Daveyone
  • 12/12/2013 Make a Comment (1)
  • Contributed by: Daveyone ( 30 articles in 2013 )
Like many I am bemused by our Government's urgency in bringing the opportunity of gay marriage forward to next March.
Be Grateful Today!
Like many I am bemused by our Government's urgency (and that of the Obama administration for that matter but probably not Russia) in bringing the opportunity of gay marriage forward to next March. As anyone who has read my articles over the years will recognise that I say live and let live to all those who do no harm to others, but I felt this issue was covered by the laws of Civil Partnership in equalising most practical and financial matters. My reading of this is that the Gay community are not that bothered either and it has just brought them into conflict with the religious community, as I say live and let live. 'I often read articles by Peter Tatchell and Peter Hichins and find myself agreeing and disagreeing in similar measure with both Peters'

What I will be interested to see is the first Gay divorce; as someone who has campaigned for the past 10 years for equal parenting rights for Fathers and Mothers where gender bias is rampant in our Family Courts who are governed by financial greed riding on the back of an 'Animal Farm' style of equality which all too common in society today.

Can you imagine anyone of Elton John's age being able to adopt without his wealth, and if he left David Furnish who would play mum? The trouble is whilst many of us have been fighting to keep families together in the face of corrupt and militant Child Protection Services perpetuated by the equally corrupt a fore mentioned Family Courts, we find that gay parents rely on the adoption or surrogacy service and I will long to see the court meltdown when 2 mothers turn up to contest the residency of in effect someone else's child!

As we have established celebrity marriage/parenting is very different then for those of us in the real world, Madonna's children will not want for much even if one day she does not want them and CAFCASS did not appear to be involved in the 25 million pounds McCartney settlement . We are all sworn to secrecy or face contempt of court whilst Katie Price and Peter Andre were able to make a high earning documentary about their divorce and we learned all about the ins and outs of what they believed was in the best interest of their children!

I was troubled earlier this week when I received a communique suggesting Israels treatment of Palestinians is now considered as ethnic cleansing and I wonder how do the religions reconcile themselves with Gay Marriage? Is this a wider form of ethic cleansing by our Governments whilst all the major religions seem to fall silent on this subject? I wonder what their wider view of Family Justice is? A few years back I attended a New Fathers 4 Justice protest at Canterbury Cathedral with the message that fathers are for life and not just Christmas. As it turned our the former Archbishop was not there but instead was at Lambeth Palace giving interviews to the BBC seeking to put the Church in a better light via the media . This I think was largely ignored as was our protest. I do suggest though before any religion start to moralise on this or any other issue they should reflect on themselves. I was heartened by the Occupy at St. Paul's protesting at austerity from within the richest borough in Britain and the division observed when a clergyman resigned in support of the protesters, just how rich is the church by the way.I was also amused at a cartoon of the Pope saying prey for the poor whilst holding a Golden staff and orb, maybe he and others in the Catholic church should work to oust and prosecute their members who are guilty of abuse to the young and vulnerable. Perhaps Muslim clerics should seek to reeducate the Islamists' who believe that Allah is anything but peace loving. Returning to Israel and what do they want to achieve maintain a 70 year old conflict into the next 100 year war? Surely the time has come for reconciliation with 2 nations with more in common then against, who could work together to make that region prosperous, safe and beneficial to all it's citizens maybe a shared religious capital, if independent administration centres?
As a young boy growing up in London in the 1960's I often wondered why ITN anchorman, Andrew Gardner would always refer to conflict in the Middle East when what we saw on the screens was a land where the sun always seemed to shine how could that be? In a week when we saw the loss of Nelson Mandela I was reminded of similar controversial figure in the form of King Hussain of Jordan who died in 1999. Both men promoted peace and reconciliation and at The King's Funeral as with Nelson Mandela's memorial service we see the Worlds friends and foes come together George Bush Snr & Saddam Hussain, this week we saw The President of the United States alongside Robert Mugarbe and previous apartheid supporters from our own Government and war mongering Blair who was warned by King Hussain that if he invaded Iraq he would be opening a can of worms that would be difficult to close and has been proven correct to this day. I wonder why those who lead us cannot take heed from these two wise elder statesmen.
It is clear the United Nations has failed so where is the moral compass from the richest and powerful nations including Russia? Instead of chastising Iran over it's Nuclear ambitions why not seek to work with them to promote this serious power source for export to neighbouring countries, even Europe when Russia holds them to ransom for fuel supplies. Instead of paying despot 3rd world nations to buy arms to fight each other whilst their population starves why not lay solar energy panels throughout the sunniest regions such as Africa with the potential of exporting any surplus? Instead of bombing innocent civilians with drones in Pakistan why not get Monsanto to Genetically Modify the opium crop so it has little value to the Taliban

I now the term Commonwealth has colonial overtones which does not sit comfortably with many but why don't we strive for a Common Wealth for all both morally and financially?

See the full illustrated edition below.


    By:Brian P from SA, Aust on December 18, 2013 @ 9:50 am
    The recent gay marriage debate in the High Court apparently swung around the definition of "marriage".

    Personally, I prefer sticking with the view of a former High Court judge Michael McHugh who once said that "in 1901 'marriage' was seen as meaning a voluntary union for life between one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others. If that level of abstraction were now accepted, it would deny the Parliament of the Commonwealth the power to legislate for same-sex marriages".

    Human rights all appear to be dandy and all and that's great but what about whn the 2 male parents say it was ok for their son to put his dick in his brothers arse, then where do we go?

    Seriously, this gay marriage shit has to be thought through properly. Where's the research that says it's ok for everyone, short and long term?

    Until there is some, perhaps we should stick to good ol common sense and what works!

(Note: If wrong - comments will not be posted)

1Will not be visible to public.
2Receive notification of other comments posted for this article. To cease notification after having posted click here.
3To make a link clickable in the comments box enclose in link tags - ie.<link>Link</link>.

To further have your say, head to our forum Click Here

To contribute a news article Click Here

To view or contribute a Quote Click Here

Hosting & Support by WebPal© 2020 All rights reserved.