LORDS COULD VOTE DOWN MARRIAGE BILL ON 3 JUNE

Just had the following email come through from Colin Hart – Coalition for Marriage.

 

Dear marriage supporter,

Lord Dear, an independent cross-bench Peer and respected former police Chief Constable, will lead a vote against the Government’s same-sex marriage Bill at Second Reading in the House of Lords on Monday 3 June.

If he wins, the Bill will be defeated outright. It will be a decisive blow for the Government’s undemocratic plans to redefine marriage. But don’t worry if Lord Dear doesn’t achieve a majority. There will still be other opportunities to defeat the Government at later stages in the Lords.

Opposition to the Bill is growing. Last night on BBC Question Time, Defence Secretary Philip Hammond said the plans to redefine marriage had “upset vast numbers of people” and generated a “real sense of anger” among voters.

He said: “I have just never felt that this is what we should be focusing on. This change does redefine marriage. For millions and millions of people who are married, the meaning of marriage changes. There is a real sense of anger among many people who are married that any government thinks it has the ability to change the definition of an institution like marriage.”

WATCH the video

The Government is in disarray. Today they’ve announced another U-turn on the Bill. They will hold a review to decide whether heterosexual couples should be allowed to opt for a civil partnership rather than marriage. That would cost the nation between £3bn and £4bn in public service pensions alone.

We’ve been right all along. This Bill is about unravelling the place of marriage in our society, regardless of the social or financial cost. While the rest of us struggle to pay our bills, the political elite are unpicking marriage rather than sorting out the economy.

That’s why the Lords vote on Monday 3 June is a big day for the nation and for our campaign.

Before the Bill gets to the Lords, MPs in the House of Commons get the chance to vote on amendments to the Bill on Monday and Tuesday. At the end of Tuesday’s debate they’ll have a chance to vote once more on the Bill as a whole at Third Reading. We will keep you posted with the latest news.

We are shifting the debate, and we believe it is possible to win in the Lords. So let’s keep going. Together we can keep the real meaning of marriage.

 

Read Full Post »

BBC Question Time – 16/05/2013

Question Time (TV series) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I started watching ‘Question Time’ last evening but fortunately fell asleep only to come round in time for a question on changing the definition of marriage. I wonder why I watch this program sometimes, but I do as a way to stay try to be ‘informed’.

There used to be a transcript of the program so this is just from memory. The question was: an online petition has been signed by 650,000 (approx) people, is it time for the government to have a re-think? My brief answer – not a chance. The only thing that will make a government or MP re-think is if they think it will gain them votes. In other words, they want to keep their job.

Question Time is a good name because Answer Time it ain’t! Defence Secretary, Philip Hammond MP gave a sort of answer saying he had voted against it but expected the bill to be passed. Shadow Immigration Minister, Chris Bryant MP got quite emotional at one point as openly Homosexual.

Not one of the panel answered the question – well I suppose they did. The answer was no. What they didn’t do was give any rationale for it. Basically, nice people let other people do anything they like because it makes them happy. Oh, and it’s what the people want. Funny how the people want a Referendum on the EU, the people, I believe, would like to see the return of the death penalty – don’t see any sign of ‘the people’ getting those. But because homosexuals want to re-define marriage, suddenly it’s because the people want it.

It’s those nasty intolerant bigoted Christians that believe the Bible – that’s the real problem. And so it was left to the questioner to have his say. Once he started to speak, it was clear he was a Christian – man, did the heat turn up in that place or what!. The poor bloke ended up nearly shouting to get a hearing.

The bill is to be voted on next week I think. So we can look forward to any combination coming together in ‘marriage’. Except it won’t be marriage. Marriage was given by God. So here we see probably the clearest act of autonomy and rebellion towards God. The basic building block of society given by God is rejected. We ought to expect a perversion of what God has graciously given. The Bill will probably go through – whether this is (further) evidence that God is handing us over as a Nation is up for discussion. But a scary prospect all the same. Let’s pray Parliament will come to their senses and vote it out.

Related articles

• Hammond: ‘Sense of anger’ over gay marriages (itv.com)
• No huge demand for gay marriage, says Philip Hammond (guardian.co.uk)
• ‘No great demand for gay marriage’ (belfasttelegraph.co.uk)

Read Full Post »

Marriage Matters – letter to MP

Colin Hart of Coalition for Marriage asked for emails / letters to be sent to MP’s. The following is the email I sent today to my MP. Mark Pawsey is actually supportive of traditional marriage but Politicians sometimes need the encouragement – and the backbone – to stick to their principles. To be fair we all need that, it’s easy to buckle when the pressure is on. Pray for grace to stand firm.

Dear Mr Pawsey,

Suggestions for points to make:

• We’ve already seen equality laws being used against people who express support for traditional marriage.
• Foster carers should not be blacklisted by local councils just because they oppose same-sex marriage.
• Religious groups should not be banned from hiring public venues just because they support traditional marriage.
• The Public Sector Equality Duty should not be used to punish those who support traditional marriage, like teachers or other public sector workers.
• True equality should mean fairness, but these days it means imposing political correctness on people.

I have pasted these in as they seem fairly reasonable and I’d ask you to vote against the bill and support the historical and current meaning of marriage.

Maybe those that want to see a change to the definition of marriage would like to consider coming up with their own definition rather than hi-jacking what has been perfectly acceptable for hundreds of years. It’s a bit like wanting to call a circle a square simply because I want it to be so. I do not agree with their lifestyle choice – and it is a choice – but I accept the provision of legislation that will protect same-sex couples in cases of tax and inheritance in the same way sisters that live together might need protection. But I fail to see why Marriage needs to be re-defined in order to achieve it.

The real reason behind this – it seems to me – is to further undermine the Christian faith. Continuing to undermine the Christian principles our Nation has been [founded] upon can only result in disaster for all of us. It will of course create a new minority – if it doesn’t already exist – of Christians and I can’t see the same paradigm shifts taking place to accommodate them, can you.

Thanks for supporting Marriage in the past, please continue to do so.

Kind Regards,

Read Full Post »

Is this Goodbye to Free Speech?

View of the House of Lords Chamber in the Palace of Westminster, London, looking from the galleries towards the Throne (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The second reading of the Same-Sex Marriage bill was passed a couple of weeks ago but I wrote most of this on the day of the vote but for some reason didn’t post it – so here it is!

Will this vote see the end of Free Speech. It should concern any lover of Democracy, that the freedom to disagree with the Same-Sex legislation will end. I believe it will see the beginning of a Witch-Hunt to find and root out ‘deniers’ of Same-Sex Marriage.

Stonewall and other ideological lobby groups will over time entrap unsuspecting believers (Christians)  into saying something that will force a prosecution. This is already happening. Stonewall, I suggest, will not rest until everyone sees Homosexual & Lesbian practice and therefore Same-Sex Marriage as normal.

I haven’t heard or read (please correct me) about any protection for individuals in the work place or any other place for that matter that disagrees or believes that not only same-sex marriages but homosexuality & lesbianism is sinful according to the Bible. There looks to be only protection for Individual Ministers & Religious Organisations (if it happens) but nothing for the ordinary individual Christian, e.g. in the workplace. Not just Christians, but anyone that agrees with the phrase ”I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” (attributed to Voltaire) ought to be concerned. I’ll certainly be writing to my MP (and PM) again about this.

With Martin Luther then we must surely say:

“Unless I am convinced by proofs from Scriptures or by plain and clear reasons and arguments, I can and will not retract, for it is neither safe nor wise to do anything against conscience. Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me. Amen.”

Where this leaves the Bible in all this will be interesting to see because the Bible teaches the very opposite of what could soon be enshrined in UK Law.

Will the Bible be outlawed? Will some passages of the Bible be outlawed and will those that believe those passages and indeed all the Bible be outlawed?

Where to now? The Bill now passes through to the House of Lords and to further scrutiny by Parliament  There is then – I think – a third reading before it becomes law. The Bill will come under intense critical reading as it moves through the Parliamentary process.  Whether this will be the opportunity to build into legislation protection for those that disagree I can’t say. But to not prosecute ‘deniers’ raises the question about what it was all about in the first place. It seems to me prosecutions will follow.

I do not believe the majority are for this change - but what is more likely to be true is that the majority just can’t be bothered. Apathy.

There is another possible alternative for the Church to think about. Go here to read about it – but basically the Church itself re-defines marriage and calls it Holy Matrimony.

I only heard snippets from the speeches but was struck that some MP’s said or at least implied something like: ‘I don’t believe God would be against same-sex marriage’ or ‘a God of love would not allow same-sex couples in loving relationships to be barred from marriage’ or similar sentiments. But how can anyone presume to speak for God when He has already spoken plainly in His Word the Bible.

Why anyone would want to claim the name of Christian or follower of Jesus and yet completely ignore what He has to say can only be explained by the words of the Apostle Paul as follows:

2 Timothy 3:1-9

1 But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2 People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4 treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.

6 They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7 always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth. 8 Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these teachers oppose the truth. They are men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. 9 But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone.

2 Timothy 4:3, 8 & 9

New International Version (NIV)
3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.

8 We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.

Read Full Post »

David Cameron backs Gay Marriage

BBC News – Gay marriage plan ‘barking mad’ says Tory MP David Davies.

Surprised? Nope

Disappointed? Yes

That’s another broken promise.

Read Full Post »

Redefinition of Marriage

Marriage is set to be redefined by the Coalition Government – particularly PM David Cameron. No doubt Mr Clegg will be happy with the liberalisation of pretty much anything he can get away with.

What is marriage? Whose idea is it? Where did it come from?

What is Marriage?

We are told very early on in the Bible exactly what marriage is:

Gen 2:23 Then the man said, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.”
Gen 2:24 Therefore a man shall leave his father (that’s a man) and his mother (that’s a woman) and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

Is there another way to interpret the word Man or the word Woman in the verse? Jesus certainly didn’t think so! And neither has the Church down through the last several hundred years. It’s the union between a man and a woman.

Here are the words of Jesus that I quote showing a marriage to be between a man and a woman: Mark 10:12  ’and if she (that’s a woman) divorces her husband (that’s a man) and marries another (man), she commits adultery.”  The Apostle Paul writes that marriage between a man and a woman has much deeper theological significance:

Ephesians 5:31 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”
v 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.
v 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

Whose idea is Marriage and where did it come from?

Well not politicians that’s for sure. The previous Bible verses tell us quite plainly that marriage has its origins in the mind of God and that politicians have no moral (or even legal) authority to redefine it. We all fall under the law of God – The Ten Commandments. It’s no use fighting it. Say what you will. Redefine what you will. It changes nothing. The Law of God stands fast! The Word of God is sure!

By redefining marriage the Government demonstrate their own relativism. They are demonstrating the fact that they have no objective morality and David Cameron as Prime Minister in particular. I don’t want to be accused of political bias because all three of the main political parties are the same. Why should I vote for a party that tells me through their philosophy ‘I can’t be trusted’? In other words without an objective morality political parties and politicians can (and do) change their mind on anything. At least this tells us why they can’t be trusted! The Bible tells us that sinners (that’s all of us) hold down the truth in unrighteousness. In other words, the truth is known to us because we are made in the image of God but the truth must be held down because it’s not palatable. This explains why at the deepest level a mistrust of relativism in the human spirit is realised and that relativism cannot be lived. We cannot live in a relativistic world – it’s impossible. We live in Gods objective world whether we like it or not. I like it.

What I am going to do when it comes to voting at the next election is problematic to say the least.

Related articles

• Carey’s views on marriage ‘archaic’, says Young (independent.co.uk)
• Lord Carey tells David Cameron: Letting gays marry would be wrong (dailymail.co.uk)
• New Marriage Web Site: (deaconforlife.blogspot.com)
• David Cameron’s same sex marriage plans are ‘madness’ says Cardinal (thesun.co.uk)

Read Full Post »

What’s wrong with Same-Sex partnerships?

Image by Fergal OP via Flickr

A few days ago (Christmas Day) over here, Elton’s parenthood made front page news. All sorts of questions are asked when a high profile member of the entertainment industry obtains a child. Why do I say obtained? Although there’s the possibility of his biological parenthood, he didn’t have the child within the parameters of the usual man woman relationship. To be blunt, he bought the child. I do not intend any mean-spiritedness here at all. Like Carnegie perhaps he’s driven by a consuming desire to continue his name. Not in buildings, but in flesh.

But to answer the question – What’s wrong with Same-Sex partnerships? Behind the concept or idea of marriage lies a theology. What do I mean?

The Marriage model is based on the Love of the Lord Jesus for His church. The Church is the Bride and He is the Groom. It’s between a man and a woman. Homosexual or same-sex partnerships strike at the very heart of Christian Theology. Homosexual relationships are actually just as blasphemous as adulterous heterosexual relationships. These are not relationships intended by God. It would be stupid of me to deny that love exists between same sex partners – it clearly does. All I’m seeking to show is that the marriage model is where love is to be appropriately  manifested.

To state it more clearly then, the marriage model begins and began with God. It was not something man (I’m using man generically here i.e mankind) initiated, invented or thought would be a good idea. No, Gen 2:24: ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.’ So this Biblical idea (Theology) goes way back. Here are the words of the Lord Jesus:

Mat 19:4  ‘He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female,
Mat 19:5  and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?
Mat 19:6  So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”‘

And further, the words of the Apostle Paul:

Eph 5:23  For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Saviour.
Eph 5:24  Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.
Eph 5:25  Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her,
Eph 5:26  that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,
Eph 5:27  so that he might present the church to himself in splendour, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.
Eph 5:28  In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
Eph 5:29  For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church,
Eph 5:30  because we are members of his body.
Eph 5:31  “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”

Then we have the following statement:
Eph 5:32  This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.

Such is the sinfulness of man that he inverts everything, turns it upside down and makes it what it isn’t. So, the marriage model is based on Christ and the Church – a profound mystery.

But just in case anyone is tempted to take me to task for being prejudicial against any form of same-sex relationship, the Bible probably has more to say negatively about adulterous relationships than homosexuality. God hates adultery. This is so popular these days (has it ever been otherwise) that hardly anyone bothers about it – but God is bothered about it, Big Time. Lest we think we’ve escaped the searching gaze of The Lord, Jesus also has this to say:

Mat 5:27  “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’
Mat 5:28  But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

The Bible goes right to the heart – not just what we do or don’t do. That covers almost, actually all, people. What all this shows is this:

We all need a Saviour. Not one of us is innocent before The Lord God of heaven and Earth before whom we must all stand to give account at that last great day. Elton might be a sinner, but so am I. He and I need a Saviour – His name is Christ the Lord.

Related Articles

• Oh Elton, is money all that counts? (mirror.co.uk)
• Who’s the daddy? (thesun.co.uk)

Read Full Post »