Gay Marriage? – But what about EQUALITY???

But what about EQUALITY??? If Mr. Cameron was really interested in equality then perhaps he should take another look at the succession to the crown bill (passed yesterday) that still makes it illegal for a Catholic to sit on the throne on England! – Or much more importantly, perhaps he should look at the way disabled children are discriminated against in the womb (abortions are illegal in the UK after 24 weeks – unless the child is disabled. A disabled child can be aborted up until birth.) But no, instead he is insisting that Parent A and Parent B are EQUAL to a mother and a father. It beggars belief that a government so interested in the problem of absent fathers would even entertain the idea of a fatherless lesbian family – or have fathers suddenly become non important? The same goes for mothers. If me and my husband suddenly died, David Cameron is proposing the terrifying prospect that our local authority could place our two young children into the care of two men – therefor robbing them of any chance of a mother. Children need and deserve a mother and a father. And however caring and well-meaning a same-sex couple are, by their pure biology, they will never be able to offer what a child truly needs.

All the Catholics in England and Wales have been asked to write to their MP’s again this week to show their opposition to the re-definition of marriage. It seems to me that we will be hearing about this topic on an almost daily basis over the next few weeks as we draw closer to the vote on whether marriage should be re-defined or not.

The more and more I think about it though, the more I am convinced that this was the biggest mistake of David Cameron’s career. We still don’t know why he decided to bring it up when he did? Was it to deflect attention away from the failing economy? Was it to keep Nick Clegg happy in some sort of party policy ‘trade off’? Was it to gain favour with the extreme left liberal media we have here in the UK? Or was just an attempt to make the Conservative party look more hip and trendy?

What ever it was it one thing is sure. David Cameron sorely underestimated the opinion of the British public. He got it wrong. He got it very, very wrong! It is becoming more and more clear that the British public (and the French it seems!) do NOT want marriage re-defined. This puts old Davy-boy in a bit of a pickle! He is going to have to go through with the vote – otherwise he would seem weak. I suppose he could try to ‘kick it into the long grass’ but that is going to be difficult as it has become such a major issue of public interest. What ever happens, re-defining marriage will go down in history as the topic that generated the most letters that MP’s have ever received on one single issue!

I have decided to publish my letter to my local MP here in the hope that it will encourage more people to do the same. If you need any further information or advice please take a look at the coalition for marriage website:

to contact your local MP please visit ant look in the top right hand corner for ‘find your MP’.

This may be the last chance you have before (and if) the law is changed.


Dear Ms McDonagh,

We are constituents living in your area. We always vote at local and general elections.

We are writing today to tell you our views on the re-definition of marriage. As practising Catholics, we are fully opposed to the re-definition of marriage. Marriage is an institution for raising a family, and we believe that a child deserves a mother and a father not just parent A and parent B. Mother and Fathers have different and complimentary roles that simply cannot be equalled by two members of the same sex – however much they try.

This has been recently scientifically proven by Professor Mark Regnerus( )of the University of Texas. His research on “How different are the adult children of parents who have same-sex relationships?” has found that the children from same-sex families have significantly poorer life outcomes than their peers who come from a regular ‘Mum and Dad’ families:

“…The differences, it turns out, were numerous. For instance, 28 per cent of the adult children of women who’ve had same-sex relationships are currently unemployed, compared to 8 per cent of those from married mom-and-dad families. Forty per cent of the former admit to having had an affair while married or co-habiting, compared to 13 per cent of the latter. Nineteen per cent of the former said they were currently or recently in psychotherapy for problems connected with anxiety, depression, or relationships, compared with 8 per cent of the latter. And those are just three of the 25 differences I noted.” – Mark Regnerus

We are also extremely concerned that people who oppose same-sex relationships on moral or religious grounds are left open to legal prosecution. This has been the case in Canada. Hundreds of Canadians have faced legal proceedings for opposing same-sex ‘marriage’ in the public sphere following its introduction in 2005. Within five years of marriage being redefined in Canada, an estimated three hundred cases have been brought against individuals, mostly Christians, who have opposed same-sex marriage in the public sphere. The proceedings have been brought at employment boards, courts, and human rights commissions. A number of employees have been dismissed from their jobs because they have maintained a conscientious objection to same-sex marriage. Businesses have been sued and churches have been threatened with sanctions over their religious beliefs.

Examples from Canada:

  1. A television anchor on a prominent sports show was immediately dismissed after he posted his support for “the traditional and true meaning of marriage” on Twitter.
  2. A Roman Catholic bishop in Alberta, Fred Henry, was charged with a human-rights violation for writing a letter to local churches outlining the Catholic position on marriage.
  3. A Christian organization in Ontario working with some of the most marginalized disabled people in Canada was taken to court after objecting to the marriage of one of its homosexual employees. The organization faced an ultimatum and had to choose between changing its hiring and employment policy or being closed down.
  4. An evangelical Christian marriage commissioner in Saskatchewan was successfully sued for refusing to marry a homosexual couple, despite assisting the couple by putting them in touch with another marriage commissioner who would be willing to conduct the ceremony.
  5. A campaign has now begun in Canada to remove tax-free status from churches that refuse to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies. Some Canadian provinces are even considering laws to forbid teachers in private schools from teaching that traditional marriage is the ideal.

Michael Coren, writing for the National Review Online, said: “Once gay marriage becomes law, critics are often silenced by the force of the law. The Canadian litany of pain, firings, and social and political polarization and extremism is extraordinary and lamentable, and we haven’t even begun to experience the mid and long-term results of this mammoth social experiment. I seldom say it, but for goodness’ sake, learn something from Canada.”

The government has no right to mess with an institution as sacred as marriage. The British public are angry and disappointed with the suggestion that it does. Already UK politicians are voicing their concerns. For example, Michael Gove fears that the Government could be powerless to stop primary school teachers being sacked for refusing to teach gay marriage. A senior source in Mr Gove’s department said the UK was not “in control” and that the ultimate decision might “inevitably” be taken at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.  It is worth remembering that he European Court recently ruled that public sector workers can be forced to act against their sincere beliefs about marriage.

Ms McDonagh, is this what you want for the UK?

It is a very, very un-popular idea – the biggest mistake of David Cameron’s career!

Civil partnerships already protect same-sex couples when it comes to legal issues like next of kin or inheritance. What exactly will they be gaining by being ‘married’? Is this all just a poor attempt by the government to try to be seen as modern and ‘fair’? Is it an attempt to win votes? – Because if it is, then it is backfiring! Many, many Labour and Conservative voters I know are now transferring their loyalty to other parties including UKIP and Christian Peoples Alliance because of this issue alone. That is how strongly people feel about this issue – us included.

The vast majority of people within your constituency oppose the re-definition of marriage. You must represent what the people want. I hope to God that as our MP – and as a practicing Catholic yourself, you will be voting NO to the re-definition of marriage.

Yours sincerely,