A reluctant sinner has posted about the necessity of writing to one’s MP to urge them to vote against the Marriage (Same Sex Couples)
Bill. The second letter in his
post explains more clearly than I possibly could that this situation and the
proposed Bill are both farcical and that the electorate effectively have no
voice. In my own letter I asked my
MP whether, if the Bill were passed, it would give a precedent allowing a Prime
Minster to do anything once in power, regardless of the will of the electorate.
Then I remembered a similar situation a few years back.
The current situation has notable similarities to when Tony
Blair took the UK into illegal military action in Iraq, ignoring hundreds of thousands
of people marching upon Westminster as well as contravening a UN resolution and
the conditions of a 'Just War'.
This time Dave is ignoring hundreds of thousands of people,
proposing a law on the grounds of ‘equality’ that would introduce more
inequalities than either exist at present or would be introduced as a result of
the Bill as well as ignoring Natural Law and any number of other considerations
on the basis of history, anthropology, sociology, let alone religious. We even have Peter Tatchell saying that
the law is anti-equality – but Dave doesn't seem to care even what his lead
policy-maker on all things “conservative” says anymore.
So the precedent is already there for the Prime Minister to
do whatever he wants regardless of the consequences or whether there is an
electoral mandate. Perhaps this is
precisely what the redefinition of marriage is all about: David Cameron saying
to Tony Blair,
“anything you can do I can do ‘better’,
I can ignore the vast majority of the British electorate better than you!”
I've yet to fathom any other reason for it...
Some links:
A reluctant sinner's post and example letters, here
A good example of a letter to one's MP, here. There are lots of follow-up posts on the same blog.
Lots of resources and the petition still available to be signed (for what it's worth) at the Campaign for Marriage site, here
Please pass this on!
ReplyDeleteROSARY TOMORROW, 5th February, 12 am GMT, FOR THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE
Tomorrow (5th of February), the first bill proposing same-sex marriage is going to be heard in British Parliament. I ask you to join me, and many others, in the praying of a rosary tomorrow to ask for Our Lady's intercession in this. We are aiming to pray together at 12 am, noon (GMT) tomorrow. Pray whatever you are able to do - a decade, a Mystery, the full Rosary, even a short prayer to Our Lady -to beg for her help.
It is our hope that if Catholics pray together for this, we can gain Our Lady's intercession in this dark hour.
Please pass the message on any way you can! Email, blog, text, social media. 12 am tomorrow - a worldwide rosary for the defense of marriage.
God Bless.
Maria Kolbe
The culture in America has similarly eroded, to the point that the "same-sex-marriage" issue has become a heated topic here, too. I am not yet completely convinced what my response should be on the matter, but these are my present thoughts:
ReplyDeleteCivil marriage does not equate to Holy Matrimony. Whatever the civil governments of the world happen to decide, they will never legitimately wield authority over the administration of the Church's inner sacramental life; the civil authorities can never force the hand of the Church to recognize the union of two men as though it were Holy Matrimony. If the world redefines 'civil marriage' in such a way that it includes same-sex partnerships, the line of demarcation between the path of the world and that of the Church will become clearer yet.
We Christians, living as strangers in this falling world, find ourselves in a strange predicament. To some degree, we can try to exert influence upon the culture around us. But, ultimately, the world will never accept our values. The world values such notions as 'equality', 'fair treatment', 'rights', etc. - and lately seems to apprise 'marriage' in these terms. We honor matrimony as sacred, holy, an ascetic discipline, a voluntary martyrdom of each spouse for the other, an icon of Christ's love for his Church. These values mean nothing to the world.
Many Christians seem to be trying to help the world by urging 'civil marriage' to come closer to mirroring Holy Matrimony. If Christians are compelled to influence secular culture, I wonder if the Church would be better served by the abolition of civil marriage altogether. Our concerns have little to do with the 'rights' they are seeking to protect. (In the Church, we have no rights, only responsibilities.) I suppose that I would propose that the world grant rights as they will, to whomever they will... Levy taxes by whatever proportion they will...
One of the strangest, unexpected moments in my life was when, as a Protestant, the minister injected into our wedding ceremony the words, "... by the power vested in me by the State of Michigan, I pronounce you husband and wife." Really? Like I care one iota what the State of Michigan, or any other civil government thinks, concerning my marital status...
Just my thoughts... thinking out loud.
So the measure passed with strong support. What now?
ReplyDeleteSorry, hadn't noticed the comments!
ReplyDeleteMaria, i have been praying...
Todd, all is not yet decided (or lost). I'm not quite sure how it works but it will go back to Parliament again before a final vote. It will then go through the Lords (the upper house) and, until our lovely apparently-Catholic former-Prime Minister, the bellicose Tony Blair had the law changed to force laws through even if the Lords rejected them, it could still have been prevented at that stage, but alas, i think they get three chances to do it themselves then the lower house ratifies it anyway.
As for your first message, this is something i have been thinking about. It puts me in mind of the French separation of Church and State in 1905 when the state then basically re-wrote history in its own mythologised image and banned all expression of religion in schools. So, maybe it is not as bad a thing as it first appears. I'll come back to you on this as i develop my thoughts further.