Peter Tatchell gets privileged access to equal marriage consultation
For the past few weeks His Grace has been hosting the ‘Speak now or forever hold your peace’ advertisement on behalf of the Coalition for Marriage. So far, he has received no complaints from his readers and no aggressive demands from the ASA to justify the veracity of the statement. After all, an unsubstantiated assertion that the failure to speak in the present necessarily imposes an eternity of silence upon the timid is a manifest falsehood. It might even be considered offensive, especially by certain minorities of diverse ‘protected characteristics’, for whom there appears to be no limitation on self-expression, least of all in chronology..
The advertisement exhorts people to respond to the Government’s consultation on redefining marriage. It may do no good at all, of course, not least because by this consultation the Government seeks not so much to redefine marriage as change the definition of the term ‘consultation’. It is concerned exclusively with the staggeringly narrow but politically expedient ‘how’, rather than the socially responsible and morally imperative ‘if’. We have heard for months that the decision has already been taken: the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, the Home Secretary, the Equalities Minister and sundry other senior political figures are all in favour of redefining marriage to include same-sex couples, and have made their views known. A consultation which does not consult is nothing but a façade – a bit like democracy in the European Union: what the oligarchs decree, shall be.
Should the Government achieve its objective, marriage will cease to be simply marriage: instead, we shall have ‘civil marriage’ for the enlightened progressives, and ‘religious marriage’ for the recalcitrant bigots. ‘Husband’ and ‘Wife’ will become ‘Spouse 1’ and ‘Spouse 2’; ‘Father’ and ‘Mother’ will become ‘Parent A’ and ‘Parent B’. Those who seek marriage equality view it as a moral imperative in accordance with human rights. Those who seek to sustain the current definition view it as a moral imperative in accordance with natural law.
Both sides are engaged in a final push to get people to make submissions to the Government. This is the final week: the non-consultation ends on 14th June. You are urged to make your opinions known HERE.
But His Grace is puzzled, for it appears that a gay-friendly mole in Government has been leaking sensitive information to the leaders of the Campaign for Equal Marriage.
Comments from Peter Tatchell and Ben Summerskill suggest that they know the current number of responses on each side and do not like them. In an appeal for more lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people (and their straight friends) to register support for marriage equality on the Government website, Mr Tatchell said: “So far, we are outnumbered by opponents of same-sex marriage. This is disastrous. We’ve only got two weeks to reverse this imbalance.”
Since homosexuals have always been outnumbered by heterosexuals, and (presumably) Peter Tatchell knows this, he can only be referring to the relative number of respondents to the consultation. Who has passed to him this privileged information?