Cor! Busy news day today. I have only managed to get one post out, and that was mainly copypasta. It is a good read, though.
The big news today, of course, is the European Court ruling on the four Christians that were claiming some sort of religious discrimination or wrongful dismissal, or something. Only one of them had their case upheld, and I disagree with that. Especially in light of Stephen Law's article.
One item that - for some unknown reason - didn't seem to make the news, was that the Cornwall Council General meeting voted against introducing a plan that would see the county's poorest people footing the entire bill for central Government cuts. I don't hold these people in very high regard, but the right decision was returned today. The Conservatives had better watch their backs at the local elections in May. UPDATE: BBC has a report here.
Short intro tonight. It is getting late and I plan a busy morning ahead.
Showing posts with label Same sex marriage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Same sex marriage. Show all posts
Tuesday, 15 January 2013
Monday, 14 January 2013
Daily digest - Monday, 14 January 2012
Well, I have had a busy day debating and writing about same sex marriage. Two articles have been posted (first, a letter to Andrew George MP, and the second a response to one of the commenters on the original thisiscornwall page). I am appalled that such bigots exist in my region, but perhaps, should not be surprised. Where Christianity exists, bigotry will follow. Go vote up my comments here.
There was also one of those 'lighter moments' pieces that the BBC runs occasionally. It would appear that the Queen's Bentley limousine wouldn't start when she came to leave church. It was a good job Bishop Cottrell was at hand to administer some divine vehicular maintenance.
After posting yesterday's Daily Digest, I considered the fact that - considering I don't post this until quite late in the day - perhaps the following day's tide times might be more useful to people. Done and done.
There was also one of those 'lighter moments' pieces that the BBC runs occasionally. It would appear that the Queen's Bentley limousine wouldn't start when she came to leave church. It was a good job Bishop Cottrell was at hand to administer some divine vehicular maintenance.
After posting yesterday's Daily Digest, I considered the fact that - considering I don't post this until quite late in the day - perhaps the following day's tide times might be more useful to people. Done and done.
Response to Bartribe on same sex marriage
I have already posted on this subject today (if you want to read this first, I'll wait here), and have copied my initial response to my Daily Digest (*taps toes, waiting for you to read this too)
After having gone back to check for updates (which there were. Sarah Newton MP distanced herself quite vociferously against the dishonest practices of Coalition for Marriage), I read a comment by a person who named themselves barrtribe. Have left the spelling and grammatical mistakes as they were presented.
After having gone back to check for updates (which there were. Sarah Newton MP distanced herself quite vociferously against the dishonest practices of Coalition for Marriage), I read a comment by a person who named themselves barrtribe. Have left the spelling and grammatical mistakes as they were presented.
UPDATED Same sex marriage - Coalition for Marriage activists inspire people to contact their MPs
There is a clear consensus amongst the voters of this country that same sex marriage is not only okay, but something we as a nation should aspire to. He asks us to contact our MPs and let them know how we feel on the matter.
Brilliant idea!
Contact your MP and let him/her know both how you feel about same sex marriage, and if they are prepared to take a definitive stance in favour of it.
I did...
FOR THE ATTENTION OF:
Andrew George MP
St Ives
Monday 14 January 2013
Andrew George MP
St Ives
Monday 14 January 2013
Tris Stock
*************
Penzance
Cornwall
TR** ***
tris.stock@*****.***
07718******
*************
Penzance
Cornwall
TR** ***
tris.stock@*****.***
07718******
Dear Andrew George,
I have just been reading the following item on same sex marriage on thisiscornwall and was moved by the words of C4M's national campaign director, Colin Hart, who said:
"Our local activists are fired up to make sure voters have their say. We have identified these three marginal Cornish seats as key, together with 62 others nationwide. MPs can expect local voters to be pressing them on where they stand on the redefinition of marriage."
I couldn't agree more.
Equality comes before division in a fair and just society, so allowing all people - regardless of their sexuality or gender - to enjoy the rights currently afforded to only one demographic, is the only reasonable course of action. And the majority of the British public agrees:
Three in five voters back gay marriage - The Guardian
Gay marriage: public say Church is wrong - The Independent
Britons vote in favour of same-sex marriage - The Daily Mail
Will you join Mr Hart and myself in publicly supporting people's representation on same-sex marriage? Perhaps you could also take a clear stand in favour of same sex marriage?
Yours sincerely,
Mr Tris Stock
I have just been reading the following item on same sex marriage on thisiscornwall and was moved by the words of C4M's national campaign director, Colin Hart, who said:
"Our local activists are fired up to make sure voters have their say. We have identified these three marginal Cornish seats as key, together with 62 others nationwide. MPs can expect local voters to be pressing them on where they stand on the redefinition of marriage."
I couldn't agree more.
Equality comes before division in a fair and just society, so allowing all people - regardless of their sexuality or gender - to enjoy the rights currently afforded to only one demographic, is the only reasonable course of action. And the majority of the British public agrees:
Three in five voters back gay marriage - The Guardian
Gay marriage: public say Church is wrong - The Independent
Britons vote in favour of same-sex marriage - The Daily Mail
Will you join Mr Hart and myself in publicly supporting people's representation on same-sex marriage? Perhaps you could also take a clear stand in favour of same sex marriage?
Yours sincerely,
Mr Tris Stock
***UPDATE***
I have a reply from Andrew George MP:
EQUAL MARRIAGE
Thank you for your recent email in support of equal marriage. I agree with you.
I am aware that this is an issue which provokes strong opinions and passionate debate. I also acknowledge that there is an established view held by some people of what are perceived to be 'conventional' (and acceptable) and 'unconventional' (and unacceptable) relationships. Personally, irrespective of my own nature, I am always pleased to celebrate both the public declaration of love and the commitment to an enduring fidelity between two adults, irrespective of who they are or what their nature is. I do not take the view that there are first order relationships and second; nor that there are superior and inferior marriages.
I will look carefully at the outcome of the Government's consultation into their proposals and monitor the debate carefully.
On balance, I believe that the Government is right, providing it can reassure those that there will be no compulsion for any church to be mandated to permit or to undertake on their premises a marriage ceremony to which they would wish not to give their consent/blessing. I note that the Church of England claim that any such exemption "could be challenged" by some litigious and theologically campaigning homosexual under the European Convention on Human Rights. However, I am not convinced that this is likely; especially given the Convention's commitment to respect/defend religious freedom. The Church has often refused to marry divorcees and a local church can deny marriage to those with no parochial connection. I am not aware of any church being taken to a European Court to have those practices challenged. Therefore I would not expect this to be either.
I hope you will find this response helpful and that it clarifies for you my own approach to this matter.
For your information, I have received many letters/emails from constituents who vehemently disagree with my/the Government’s view on this matter.
Once again, thank you very much for taking the time and trouble to contact me on this matter. If you have any further questions or concerns then please do not hesitate to contact me.
With good wishes.
Yours sincerely,
Andrew George MP
File Ref: 12/13.1/ag/jr
Andrew George MP
Trewella
18 Mennaye Road
Penzance
Cornwall TR18 4NG
Tel: 01736 360020
Monday, 4 June 2012
Ten reasons why we are winning on gay "marriage"
I don't write much on gay rights. As a heterosexual man, it is not a subject that directly touches me. To be honest, I feel a bit of a fraud.
That said, I do take an interest in oppressed groups, especially if there is an overlap into areas of interest where I have more experience.
Tom Gilson writes a blog called The Thinking Christian that I follow. He is not your typical Christian blogger, inasmuch as he is actually very lucid and the quality - if not the content - of his writing is of a high standard.
In today's RSS feed I came across one of his latest posts entitled '10 reasons we are losing on gay "marriage"'. I couldn't help myself.
That said, I do take an interest in oppressed groups, especially if there is an overlap into areas of interest where I have more experience.
Tom Gilson writes a blog called The Thinking Christian that I follow. He is not your typical Christian blogger, inasmuch as he is actually very lucid and the quality - if not the content - of his writing is of a high standard.
In today's RSS feed I came across one of his latest posts entitled '10 reasons we are losing on gay "marriage"'. I couldn't help myself.
Friday, 13 January 2012
Should governments recognise any marriage?
Source: Catholic News Agency
Considering that religious types are so opposed to same sex marriage, and that it is a violation of religious principles, is it time we accepted them at their word and separate the church and state further by calling on our governments to not recognise marriage at all?
From the Catholic News Agency;
It would certainly make taxation, housing, property, employment discrimination and benefits, adoption, education and health care more transparent and less bureaucratic. It would also fit well with the letter and application of the first amendment to the US constitution not letting government establish a religion.
If we are to treat religious freedom with the respect it so unswervingly demands, the only conceivable way in which to do this is to separate marriage - and all that that implies - from matter's governmental.
Churches would then be free to continue refusing same sex marriages, or not, as the case may be. Quite why someone would want to marry in a church that opposes the very premise of their union is beyond me. I am sure they could find a more suitable venue where their choice in partners is catered to, and if not, I am equally sure such an enterprise would become available in the Land Of The Free.
I welcome this position on the separation of marriage from government in the interests of religious freedom.
Edit: Here is another post on Slate covering the same subject.
Considering that religious types are so opposed to same sex marriage, and that it is a violation of religious principles, is it time we accepted them at their word and separate the church and state further by calling on our governments to not recognise marriage at all?
From the Catholic News Agency;
Thirty sex religious leaders joined together against redefining marriage in America, warning that such a move would have “far-reaching consequences” for religious freedom.
In their statement, they said that marriage is a universal and foundational institution that “precedes and transcends” any government, society or religious group. This, they explained, is because it is rooted in the nature of the human person as male and female and the children that are born from their union.
The religious leaders argued that changing the civil definition of marriage changes hundreds or even thousands of laws that are dependent upon marital status, including taxation, housing, property, employment discrimination and benefits, adoption, education and health care.
It would certainly make taxation, housing, property, employment discrimination and benefits, adoption, education and health care more transparent and less bureaucratic. It would also fit well with the letter and application of the first amendment to the US constitution not letting government establish a religion.
If we are to treat religious freedom with the respect it so unswervingly demands, the only conceivable way in which to do this is to separate marriage - and all that that implies - from matter's governmental.
Churches would then be free to continue refusing same sex marriages, or not, as the case may be. Quite why someone would want to marry in a church that opposes the very premise of their union is beyond me. I am sure they could find a more suitable venue where their choice in partners is catered to, and if not, I am equally sure such an enterprise would become available in the Land Of The Free.
I welcome this position on the separation of marriage from government in the interests of religious freedom.
Edit: Here is another post on Slate covering the same subject.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)