Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gay marriage: Eight centuries of law obliterated overnight (U.K.)
The Telegraph (U.K.) ^ | March 13, 2012 | Daniel Brennan

Posted on 03/13/2012 5:54:11 PM PDT by Stoat

Most people thought they knew what marriage meant, namely the union of a man and a woman. In 2004, when the Civil Partnership Act was passed to provide legal protections for homosexual partnerships, Parliament was led to believe by the government of the day that this did not affect the established institution of marriage. But barely eight years later, political fashion has changed.

More recently, though, familiar words such as “husband and wife” and “mother and father” are disappearing from the statute books in the small minority of countries that have begun the experiment in social engineering.

(edit)

In Canada, since same-sex marriage was brought in, the courts have ruled that a child can legally have three parents, and in the province of British Columbia serious attempts have been made to legalise polygamy. After all, if you can abolish the most important pre-condition of marriage – namely that it requires a person of each sex – why should you be able to retain other pre-conditions, such as limiting it to only two people?

In the Netherlands, where same-sex marriage was introduced in 2001, “cohabitation agreements” have been used to give three-way relationships a measure of legal recognition. It is even being advocated as the next step over here. One Guardian writer, Martin Robbins, recently responded to these concerns by arguing “What’s wrong with polygamy?” He went on: “It seems to me that a child brought up by three loving parents would have some quite big economic advantages…”

(edit)

(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: britain; gaymarriage; greatbritain; homosexual; homosexualagenda; homosexuals; law; polygamy; romneymarriage; uk; ungland; unitedkingdom
Lord Brennan QC has been a Queen’s Counsel since 1985 and is a former chairman of the Bar Council

Lord Brennan, QC Authorised Biography – Debrett’s People of Today, Lord Brennan, QC Profile

Daniel Brennan, Baron Brennan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

*************************************************

This Telegraph article was severely edited and as such the remaining snippets here at FR leave a considerable amount out that I feel is worth a thoughtful reader's time.  I'm hoping interested people will read the full article at the Telegraph site.

1 posted on 03/13/2012 5:54:16 PM PDT by Stoat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; little jeremiah; manc
A ping request for the Homosexual Agenda list, and I'm including our friend Manc because I thought he might be interested.
2 posted on 03/13/2012 5:55:18 PM PDT by Stoat (If you want a vision of the future, imagine a Birkenstock stamping on a human face... forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

It was always a danger, at least in the modern era, as the state’s definition of marriage is simply what judges, pols, or the majority think it can be at any one time. That works fine, up until the state’s definition departs from the actual definition, and society has become used to letting the state determine what a marriage can or can’t be.

Freegards


3 posted on 03/13/2012 6:01:23 PM PDT by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

the homosexual agenda
1-get social security for domestic partners
this crashes ss faster than almost anything.
2-homosexual adoption
hard to imagine this being helpful
3-same as every other lib agenda.
increase the size of government and
decrease the liberty of normal people


4 posted on 03/13/2012 6:05:31 PM PDT by genghis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: genghis

“3-same as every other lib agenda.
increase the size of government and
decrease the liberty of normal people”

Well said.


5 posted on 03/13/2012 6:10:20 PM PDT by max americana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ransomed

Europeans, Brits in particular are pretty much responsible for the proliferation of male homosexuality over the last 800 hundred years.
Hang out at Eton, it’s worse than the Catholic Seminary’s.
You can not segregate normal healthy adolescents and teens from one another.
Their hormones are surging and if they have no outlet for normal interests except with their own sex...
Whaddya expect?

I am not talking pre marital sex, that’s been going on since we were created!

The Brits are and were the very worst of elitist, segregational, caste driven societies.

You get what you ask for.

They will be part of the Caliphate soon.


6 posted on 03/13/2012 6:17:25 PM PDT by acapesket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

Guess it’ll be back to the salt mines....


7 posted on 03/13/2012 6:18:51 PM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

Guess it’ll be back to the salt mines....


8 posted on 03/13/2012 6:19:25 PM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

Guess it’ll be back to the salt mines....


9 posted on 03/13/2012 6:20:15 PM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

thanks for the ping.

I heard that the Catholic church is fighting this over there which is good but I bet if the muslims, Hindu’s, Sikh’s etc got on board then the marriage will stay normal.

Seems the left is ready for a show down within itself.

Oh and having been raised in foster homes then I can say that no kid is asking to be put into a home with two men or two women and I know of one kid who killed himself due tot he social services leaving a boy with a mentally sick homosexual woman


10 posted on 03/13/2012 6:21:03 PM PDT by manc (Marriage is between one man and one woman,It's not a conservative view but a true American view)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat; WmShirerAdmirer; lilycicero; MaryLou1; glock rocks; JPG; Monkey Face; RIghtwardHo; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.


11 posted on 03/13/2012 6:21:48 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat
 
"I KNOW BUT ONE CODE OF MORALITY FOR MEN WHETHER ACTING SINGLY OR COLLECTIVELY"
--Thomas Jefferson
 
Got Natural Law?
 
 
Sex, Evolution and Behavior
By Martin Daly and Margo Wilson
 
 
Got Socio-Biological Fitness?
 
 "Gay" penguins don't - not even in the San Francisco zoo
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&source=hp&q=San+Francisco+gay+penguins
 
FAIL.

12 posted on 03/13/2012 6:27:39 PM PDT by LomanBill (Animals! The DemocRats blew up the windmill with an Acorn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat
why should you be able to retain other pre-conditions, such as limiting it to only two people?

I have been saying this for years. If there is nothing special about marriage being between a man and a woman; then, what is so damned special about the number 2?

13 posted on 03/13/2012 6:36:33 PM PDT by LibertarianLiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

The real question is why would a supposedly “conservative” prime-minster even think of entertaining such an abominable proposition?


14 posted on 03/13/2012 6:51:22 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise

Vote Ukip, at least they are actually conservative, and from what I can gather from their website oppose “gay” marriage.


15 posted on 03/13/2012 7:08:19 PM PDT by JSDude1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Stoat; 185JHP; 230FMJ; AFA-Michigan; AKA Elena; APatientMan; Abathar; Absolutely Nobama; ...
Homosexual Agenda and Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

Thank you, Stoat, and I will read the entire article. The screaming nosedive into the moral flaming cess pit will be turned around. It has to, because a flaming moral cess pit will quickly become total anarchy and chaos. But we may have to go through the anarchy part to get back to sanity and morality. I wish I could see the future.

16 posted on 03/13/2012 7:21:07 PM PDT by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell. Signed, a fanatic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

I usually ping both lists for homosexual marriage stuff since it involves churches and religious expression and destruction of the natural family, adoption and so on.


17 posted on 03/13/2012 7:26:47 PM PDT by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell. Signed, a fanatic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ransomed
The whole deal fails eventually ~ the cold, hard fact of human male-female pair-bonding is at east 4.5 and maybe 10.0 million years old.

Current fads are not likely to last against that intense pressure.

18 posted on 03/13/2012 7:37:28 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: manc
I bet if the muslims, Hindu’s, Sikh’s etc got on board then the marriage will stay normal.

I can see the Muzzies secretly encouraging gay marriage, then pretending to be horrified when it passes. Gives them another reason to reject the British system in favor of their own, Sharia.

19 posted on 03/13/2012 7:45:56 PM PDT by ZOOKER ( Exploring the fine line between cynicism and outright depression)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Ransomed
....society has become used to letting the state determine what a marriage can or can’t be.

 

Indeed, and far too many people have become so lazy that they are no longer willing to stand up to the tyranny of The State, particularly when The State does the bidding and wields a cudgel  in favor of a truly vicious, tiny, and in this case mentally ill minority.

20 posted on 03/13/2012 7:55:40 PM PDT by Stoat (If you want a vision of the future, imagine a Birkenstock stamping on a human face... forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: genghis; manc
the homosexual agenda
1-get social security for domestic partners
this crashes ss faster than almost anything.

And homosexuals 'need' Social Security benefits far less than healthy people, since their net worth is typically very high.  Children and true families are rather expensive.

2-homosexual adoption
hard to imagine this being helpful

 Indeed, and if you'll scroll to Manc's essential post at #10 here, you'll see how very badly it can end up.  Sure, suicides occur in healthy families as well, but when you start out with people who are mentally ill, the results are more likely to be bad.


3-same as every other lib agenda.
increase the size of government and
decrease the liberty of normal people

 

I can't think of a single lib agenda item that 'actually' increases liberties for normal, sane, healthy people.

21 posted on 03/13/2012 8:22:59 PM PDT by Stoat (If you want a vision of the future, imagine a Birkenstock stamping on a human face... forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: manc
thanks for the ping.

You're quite welcome :-) Your perspective is always sincerely appreciated.

I heard that the Catholic church is fighting this over there which is good but I bet if the muslims, Hindu’s, Sikh’s etc got on board then the marriage will stay normal.

Seems the left is ready for a show down within itself.

Leftists have become adept at performing all manner of philosophical calisthenics when trying to justify their support for wildly differing hate groups, violent 'religions' , mentally ill and criminal perspectives.  At the end of the day, the only thing that will ultimately matter is whether or not the group or perspective in question is a threat to Western civilization.  If it is, then they'll have the Left's unending and enthusiastic support.

Oh and having been raised in foster homes then I can say that no kid is asking to be put into a home with two men or two women and I know of one kid who killed himself due tot he social services leaving a boy with a mentally sick homosexual woman

How terribly sad, and how entirely preventable and meaningless an end for this boy.  Every life the Left touches, it ultimately destroys.

22 posted on 03/13/2012 8:48:42 PM PDT by Stoat (If you want a vision of the future, imagine a Birkenstock stamping on a human face... forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: narses
Thank you very much for pinging your list  :-)

 

 Thank You

 

23 posted on 03/13/2012 8:50:51 PM PDT by Stoat (If you want a vision of the future, imagine a Birkenstock stamping on a human face... forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianLiz
why should you be able to retain other pre-conditions, such as limiting it to only two people?

I have been saying this for years. If there is nothing special about marriage being between a man and a woman; then, what is so damned special about the number 2? 

Indeed, and it becomes entirely reasonable to ask what is so special about limiting 'marriage' to a certain species as well.  The raving lunatics who find themselves romantically drawn to horses, cows and goats are engaging in the same level of biological irrelevance as a homosexual one.

24 posted on 03/13/2012 8:57:51 PM PDT by Stoat (If you want a vision of the future, imagine a Birkenstock stamping on a human face... forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise
The real question is why would a supposedly “conservative” prime-minster even think of entertaining such an abominable proposition?

 

I'm guessing that PM Cameron is only "Conservative" to the Left and the media.  During the run-up to the last election, I remember 'many' Conservatives and others speaking about how very non-Conservative Cameron has been on many issues.

Just as is done here in the USA, conservatives in the UK are lectured by the Left and even those in their own parties that they must accept "conservatives" with liberal track records because they are supposedly the only ones who are electable.

Cameron was such a compromise candidate, but I would suggest that even with all of his faults he is still not as far to the Left as Brown or Blair.

25 posted on 03/13/2012 9:08:20 PM PDT by Stoat (If you want a vision of the future, imagine a Birkenstock stamping on a human face... forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
Thank you very much for pinging your lists and for your perspectives :-)

 

 Thank You

 

26 posted on 03/13/2012 9:10:52 PM PDT by Stoat (If you want a vision of the future, imagine a Birkenstock stamping on a human face... forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Stoat
The final statement gives his true position, and mine:
27 posted on 03/13/2012 9:36:02 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: manc

Ouch brother.

Sounds like your mate got the sh*tty end of the stick. We fostered four kids when our own were grown - the sudden quiet when they went to uni was un-nerving. I know it isn’t the same as being with your parents, but we tried to give them a loving home, no matter how screwed up they were. (two of them really were screwed up).

You are right of course, the Church is fighting this tooth and nail, but without the help of the CoE, it isn’t going to win.


28 posted on 03/13/2012 10:15:37 PM PDT by EnglishCon (Gingrich/Santorum 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: LomanBill

It is funny that the folks that believe in evolution and natural selection also think homosexuality is natural. It is not a practice that is conducive to survival of a species.


29 posted on 03/13/2012 11:11:50 PM PDT by Pining_4_TX ( The state is the great fiction by which everybody seeks to live at the expense of everybody else. ~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise
The real question is why would a supposedly “conservative” prime-minster even think of entertaining such an abominable proposition?

LOL. The Tories are what the GOP will become if Romney is the nominee.
30 posted on 03/13/2012 11:18:51 PM PDT by Antoninus (Goal #1: Defeat Romney. Goal #2: Defeat Obama. If we don't achieve both goals, 2012 is a loss.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianLiz

For that matter, there’s no reason to presuppose a sexual component to new marriage. As the definition of marriage evolves, I will be planning for the day when I will enter into a “new” marriage with my children. This is how I will thwart the government claim on my estate, and my children and grand-children will be eligible to claim social security survivor benefits upon my death..


31 posted on 03/13/2012 11:21:56 PM PDT by Sgt_Schultze (A half-truth is a complete lie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

BFL (first time I’ve done that).


32 posted on 03/14/2012 12:40:28 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
The whole deal fails eventually ~ the cold, hard fact of human male-female pair-bonding is at east 4.5 and maybe 10.0 million years old.

Try 600 million years. Unbroken line of sexual reproduction among the higher forms since the Proterozoic (no fossil record worth mentioning for the evolved forms before 500 million years).

33 posted on 03/14/2012 12:43:09 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Stoat
The raving lunatics who find themselves romantically drawn to horses, cows and goats are engaging in the same level of biological irrelevance as a homosexual one.

The technical word is "paraphilia" and denotes a disordered attraction or orientation.

Want to get a queer fighting mad? Just refer to his favorite perversion (arguendo homosexuality, for our purposes) as a "paraphilia". He'll shoot back that homosexuality is "normal", and maybe even have the brass to cite the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM).

If he does that, ask him "Which one? The real one that was written before 1972, or the one you queers rewrote for your pleasure in 1973, after your coup d'etat takeover of the American Psychiatric Association?"

That should send him over the moon -- because it's true.

34 posted on 03/14/2012 2:58:38 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise
The real question is why would a supposedly “conservative” prime-minster even think of entertaining such an abominable proposition?

Because so many of them were "compromised" while in preparatory schools (Eton) and university (Oxbridge)?

An enterprising Fleet Street newsie, about five years ago, wrote an article about the prevalence of homosexuality in the upper reaches of the British upper class. You never saw a newspaper get turned around so fast in your life. Article spiked, suppressed, writer ..... not heard from lately.

35 posted on 03/14/2012 3:04:51 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus
I think everybody knows that part, but the "pair bonding" is the key here ~ else you could be like a bunch of chimps where a group of males bands together and deals with each female in turn as she goes into "heat".

Gorillas are at the other end of that situation ~ you have one male with a harem of females.

Humans are in the middle ~ one man and one woman ~ with some statistical outliers.

36 posted on 03/14/2012 5:45:31 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Pining_4_TX

Folks who know about evolutionary processes don’t see homosexuality as natural. It’s a biological dead end.


37 posted on 03/14/2012 5:52:16 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: acapesket

‘Europeans, Brits in particular are pretty much responsible for the proliferation of male homosexuality over the last 800 hundred years.’

Hmmm, uh-huh, yeah, whatever.

‘Hang out at Eton, it’s worse than the Catholic Seminary’s.’

Which 0.000000000..........1 of all Britons have ever gone to.

‘They will be part of the Caliphate soon.’

Course we will. Ah, the dhimmi masturbatory fantasy that never stops giving.

Now run along and see our white, upper class, Anglo-Scottish-Welsh-Portuguese-Jewish prime minister be the guest of YOUR President with the middle name of Hussein.


38 posted on 03/15/2012 9:39:30 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

I had composed an intelligent response to you, but I changed my mind.

Dhimmi’s and mastubatory? Really?

Usually liberals revert to name calling.

Perhaps Dave and Barky wanted to have a boy date at the NCAA?

lol


39 posted on 03/15/2012 6:29:18 PM PDT by acapesket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson