Grimston, Pott Row, Congham
Download 3.22 Mb.
|
1 2
- Navigate this page:
- Grimston
| Village Link
January 2013 
Grimston, Pott Row, Congham & Roydon Page One January 2013 Playing with words – or playing with fire? Not long before Christmas the government announced that in its consultation on ‘equal marriage’ 53% of the 228,000 people who had responded were in favour, that’s approximately 120,840. They chose to ignore over 600,000 people who had signed a petition against. Given that they claim that there’s a huge tide of opinion in favour of ‘equalising’ marriage, 120,800 over against 107,160 is hardly a big majority, when it’s obvious that people who want something to change are more likely to respond than people who think things are alright as they are. Opinion polls show a huge majority for marriage to remain heterosexual. ‘Equality’ hardly seems like a principle that there could be any objection to – ‘unequal’ is a bad word. But given that there is already Civil Partnership which gives all the same rights as Marriage, it’s questionable whether the present system is unequal in the first place. And in fact plenty of people in civil partnerships have said they don’t want to have Gay Marriage introduced. When the announcement was made, it was stated that the Church of England would not be allowed to conduct gay marriage ceremonies, and this in a way diverted the news slant away from the basic principle of whether Gay Marriage should be legalised. Marriage may be conducted in church or not in church, but it’s the same thing, and has been for thousands of years. Two people who agree to live together and share finances may be a partnership recognized by society, and be given all the rights of inheritance that a married couple have, but that isn’t the same as a man and a woman being married, and nor will it be the same, even if they have a marriage certificate with their names on. In the first few countries and American states that have legalised ‘Gay Marriage’, a lot of things are having to be changed. The words ‘husband’ and ‘wife’ can no longer be used on official documents, and even in some places the words ‘father’ and ‘mother’ (replaced by ‘Parent 1’ and ‘Parent 2’ – does someone have to decide who is which?). This affects all couples, families, children, not just the people who have this new title of ‘marriage’. At the moment when we refer to a married couple, we know what we mean, a husband and wife, perhaps with children or the hope of them in the future. If the marriage law is changed, is there going to be a word for such a couple, or will we have to say ‘straight couple’ to know what we mean? Marriage is too important as the bedrock of society to be messed about with, in the effort to appease a very small minority. Children grow up best with a mother and a father, if at all possible, so marriage should be protected not debased, encouraged not sabotaged. William Howard Directory: files -> 2013 2013 -> Table Of Contents introduction 2 2013 -> Atlanta Braves 2013 -> I. Intentional Torts: Physical and Emotional Harm Battery 2013 -> Clement joseph mcdonald, M. D 2013 -> Privacy and Cloud Computing for Australian Government Agencies 2013 -> Robert Klingsporn Social Issues in Sports 2013 -> Cfcc 2009-2010 Planning Objectives and Accomplishments by College Goals 2013 -> Asia-pacific telecommunity Download 3.22 Mb. Share with your friends:
|
1 2