Help! I agree with something I've read in the Daily Mail
I’m feeling rather unwell. I never thought that I would agree so wholeheartedly with something that I read in the Daily Mail, still less something on the issue of gay equality. Worryingly, it’s an article from columnist Suzanne Moore about the registrar who won’t register.
Now let me get my cards on the table. I’m proud to be a member of the Church of England. But I’m also proud to be a liberal and have always been a supporter of gay equality, speaking in the conference debate on the subject of civil partnerships back in 2000. In June 2000, I fulfilled a long-standing promise to go on the Gay Pride march with gay friends. I took my daughter, then aged almost four, along too. She had a great time, being carried piggy back from Hyde Park to Westminster by a number of friends, listening to the music and enjoying the costumes and atmosphere.
Harriet and I sat and ate lunch on the Embankment and she asked me more about what we had been doing that day. I told her that when two people loved each other, they wanted to be together and share special hugs. I said that if it was a man and a woman, like her mum and dad, then everyone thought that was a good thing, but if it was two men or two women in the couple, some people didn’t like that and thought it was wrong. With the clarity of thought and total lack of bigotry you only get in a small child, she looked at me and said, ‘I think there should be lots more love and hugs in the world, whether it’s two men or two ladies, or a mum and dad’. And I was so proud of her.
It never ceases to amaze me how people want to control other people’s relationships. If two people want to be in a relationship with each other and are free to do so, then they should not only be allowed to get on with it, but we should all celebrate and welcome their love and commitment.
So I can’t understand why people want to be so hateful and hurtful to those in a gay relationship. But if people want to keep their thoughts to themselves, I am not going to seek their conviction for Thoughtcrime.
The situation with a public servant however is entirely different. If someone is paid to serve the public, then they should do so, according to the law and their job description. If their conscience won’t allow them to do the job, then I feel that they should review whether it is the right job for them.
More to the point, Ms Ladele wasn’t being asked to perform a marriage, but a civil partnership. She might not approve of the registration of the partnership, but just as she may not approve of a marriage with a large age gap, or where she might suspect that one partner is violent to the other, it is not her position to give or withhold approval – she should just get on with the job that she is well paid to do.
In a secular state, no one should seek to put their religion before the law, whatever their personal beliefs. And yes, I know that I belong to an established church, but the laws of this land have not been controlled by the church for a long time.
Ms Ladele says that she is not homophobic and that she has lots of gay friends. I’m sorry, but the last line just shows where you are coming from. Accept it, Lillian, you ARE homophobic. Go and read Matthew 22 v39 again and think about what it really means.
Related posts:
- I’ve come over all ‘Daily Mail’ today
- The Daily Mail are pants
- The Daily Mail – where misogyny sells
Comments
Leave a Reply:
