You’d get the impression from the media…

that gay “marriage” isn’t even an issue in the UK and that our more sophisticated cousins across the Pond regard us rude country cousins with a mixture of amusement, amazement and disdain for our strange Calvinistic hangups about it.

American media aid and abet this process by reminding Americans constantly that we are illiterate manure-stomping cowboys and buffoons who must always remember that a British accent automatically confers a 50 IQ point advantage on the owner. Then it’s just a simple matter of interviewing one or two of the British elite expressing the hope that their crude American neighbors will evolve past the Neanderthal phase and enter the World Community of (10 total) Nations who have legalized gay “marriage”. Voila! American feel ashamed and stupid that we are once again so backward when the English have worked through their issues and don’t even see the problem.

Except for the fact that, in reality,

70 percent of British people believe that marriage should continue to be recognized as a life-long exclusive commitment between a man and a woman, with 84 percent believing children have the best chance in life if raised by their own mother and father in a stable and committed relationship.

Subsequent surveys offered the government little comfort. A Sunday Times poll found that fewer people supported the introduction of same-sex marriage than opposed it; most of those polled believed David Cameron was acting out of expediency rather than principle. A Telegraph poll suggested the highest levels of support for same-sex marriage, but even then 78 percent of people polled felt this wasn’t a government priority.

No wonder Spiked columnist Sean Collins, a progressive, decided to oppose gay marriage as profoundly elitist. Most Americans aren’t even aware that homosexual make up only 2% of the population and that 96% of gays in countries with legal gay “marriage” do not get married.

So why fundamentally alter the definition of marriage in order to suit the demands of a vanishingly small minority?

Here’s why: in order to provide a legal basis for compelling approval of gay sex and smashing not just speech but thoughtcrime against it. It’s a useful tool, not only for militant homosexuals, but for Caesar as he clamps down harder and harder on the Church and her worship of his main rival: the true God.

"A thing that haunts me from the EWTN torture controversy in the Bush years was ..."

Fire Raymond Arroyo
"The U.S. is deliberately closing ports of entry."

Lying Mob Boss pauses to change ..."
"Arroyo represents EWTN perfectly, why should they fire him? Instead, the USCCB should state clearly ..."

Fire Raymond Arroyo
"I realize now that you're point might be that just because a person committed illegal ..."

Lying Mob Boss pauses to change ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Joannie

    It is already common knowledge that the push for “Gay Marriage” or “Same Sex Marriage” NEVER had the support of the average heterosexual because like you stated less than 3% of any given population supports this. It is also well documented by studies made that most same sex couples do not approve of marriage as many of them cannot be monogamous. They already have the benefit of civil unions and that you would think would be enough. It is stupid that that small group should have that much power and clout in Western culture. This is one of the many reason non Christians (like the Muslims hate the Western “values” of the last few decades they are apposed to homosexuality as well the other immoral practices and customs like contraception and abortion.

  • Robert Hagedorn

    A relationship with feces? Google First Scandal.

  • I am increasingly of the opinion that there is an illusory version of reality being foisted upon the public by the media in pursuit of an amoral, liberal agenda. They report their worldview as if it were accepted by the majority; they heap abuse on anyone who opposes them, on the occasions when they chose to report that anyone opposes them in first place. The majority, duped into thinking they are a scorned minority, keep relatively silent.

    But I think things are starting to change. People are starting to realize that emperor really has no clothes. The issue of redefining marriage in the UK is one of the first signs of the crumbling facade. The government, having no democratic mandate, arrogantly decided they could run this through unopposed. Whoops! It is starting to look like they were wrong – very wrong.

    Keep the pressure up folks …

  • Charles

    Don’t forget the real activists behind the movement: pro-sterility, pro-promiscuity heterosexuals whom use homosexuals, and the inherent sterility, non-monogamy of their relationships, to muddle the societal understanding of relationships.