That would
have been a good alternative title to the recent ‘colloquium’ organised by Christian Concern.
The “One
Man, One Woman - Making the case for marriage, for the good of society” conference
was first planned to take place at The Law Society in London until they decided
that the ‘content of the conference sat uncomfortably’ with their diversity
policy.
Then it was
relocated to the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre opposite Westminster
Abbey and the Houses of Parliament, but this booking was also cancelled – on
the afternoon before the event!
At the very
last minute Christian Concern managed to find a hotel – more concerned with
business than political correctness – which hosted the event for an undisclosed
number of participants.
So is this
political correctness gone mad?
After all,
as Christian Concern have said, “Concerns have been raised by many that
supporting marriage between one man and one woman, which is still the current
legal definition of marriage, is now considered ‘homophobic’ by those pursing
the ‘equality and diversity’ agenda.”
Is having a
traditional view of marriage now beyond the pale? Unacceptable in today’s equality led society? Is this, indeed, an attack on freedom of
speech even when the organisers claimed that the meeting would be a debate
between contributors with differing views on marriage.
But the
problem with the conference was indeed with the content – not the title - because the
difficulty with many groups who are fighting tooth and nail to uphold 'traditional marriage' against ‘redefinition’
is that they find themselves having to rubbish those they want to exclude.
Despite
Andrea Williams claim that it was a discussion among people with different
views on marriage, all the summaries of speakers included in the ‘Full Colloquium Report’ were definitely against allowing gay people to get married.
What is
more, the picture they painted of same-sex couples is highly derogatory:
- According to the speakers, same-sex relationships have no concern for family – they “simply want to affirm a particular adult lifestyle”.
- Same-sex marriages “are likely to eliminate the role of fathers in the lives of children”.
- Same-sex relationships are fickle and transient – “It is very rare for same-sex couples to stay together in a life-long committed relationship”.
- In short, “The terms ‘same-sex relationships’ and ‘marriage’ are mutually exclusive”. Perhaps this is because “Each and every faithful marriage is like an amplifier of all that we know as humans to be instinctively noble, enriching and true for human flourishing.” So obviously, that rules same-sex couples out!
- After all one speaker said that the current move towards same-sex marriage is the concluding step of a cunning plan. According to Cristina Odone, journalist and media commentator, the strategy is outlined in a report from 1987 called, ‘How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s’. The final stage in the conspiracy is that “same-sex relationships... should be “celebrated” and presented as a happy and healthy lifestyle”. Heaven forbid!
At the end
of the day, if you can’t uphold your own view of marriage except by tearing
into the people you want to exclude, perhaps you should have your booking
cancelled.
