by Hilary White – Apr 02, 2013

LONDON, April 2, 2013 ( – Gay “marriage” has little to do with “equality,” being in reality the result of “an aggressive secularist and relativist” mindset that intends to abolish the very foundations of western societies, according to George Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury. The result, he said, will be the “alienation of a large minority of people who only a few years ago would have been considered pillars of society.”

Lord Carey said in an op-ed in the Daily Mail over the Easter weekend that it is “a bit rich” to hear Prime Minister David Cameron call upon Christians to “stand up and oppose aggressive secularisation” when it is he who is doing the most to push that agenda forward. Carey cited a ComRes poll that found more than two-thirds of Christians in Britain believe they are becoming a “persecuted minority”.

While such beliefs may be premature, he said, “the Prime Minister has done more than any other recent political leader to feed these anxieties.”

“I am very suspicious that behind the plans to change the nature of marriage,” Carey wrote, “…there lurks an aggressive secularist and relativist approach towards an institution that has glued society together for time immemorial.”

“By dividing marriage into religious and civil the Government threatens the church and state link which they purport to support. But they also threaten to empty marriage of its fundamental religious and civic meaning as an institution orientated towards the upbringing of children.”

He noted that, despite the government’s assurances that clergy will not be coerced into participating, the legislation contains no legal protections for laity who conscientiously object. These would include civil marriage registrars and teachers who would face the sack “if they cannot express agreement with the new politically-correct orthodoxy”.

John Smeaton, director of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, whose organization has been leading a campaign to defeat the government’s plans, applauded Lord Carey’s letter, calling it a “trumpet call” that must “resound in all sections of society, throughout Britain”.

Smeaton said the bill “discriminates against children by institutionalising motherless and fatherless families”. Smeaton also blasted the “time-serving ‘Catholic’ politicians who are prepared to betray families and children for generations to come for their short-term political advantage”.

While most pundits agree that the gay “marriage” bill will almost certainly become law, its unpopularity with the Conservative grassroots supporters is also almost equally certain to spell electoral disaster for the party. A YouGov poll found that two-thirds of members believe the Conservatives are now a divided party. At second reading in the House of Commons, 134 Conservative MPs, a majority, voted against the bill.

At the end of March, the Daily Mail reported another high-level Tory defection to the UK Independence Party (UKIP). Councillor Roger Arthur, deputy leader of Tory-controlled Horsham District Council and an aide to Cabinet minister Francis Maude, cited the Tories’ “obsession” with gay “marriage” as well as massive spending on international aid. The party has “altered out of recognition,” Arthur said, adding, “UKIP is the real Conservative Party.”

UKIP is the only party to actively oppose the government’s bill, saying it will restrict the rights of religious people to openly express and live according to their beliefs.

Ann Widdecombe, a former Tory MP and convert to Catholicism, has said that the plan to install “gay marriage” has been the most damaging scheme the party has proposed in its recent history. Widdecombe, a noted social conservative, said last week that the party has already “sacrificed” any chance of a majority victory at the next election “on the altar of gay marriage”.

Widdecombe wrote, “Equality? No. This Bill was conceived for purely political reasons and marriage has become David Cameron’s plaything.”

She added, “Those who, while privately opposing the measure, voted for it out of loyalty or ambition should now explain to constituents the profoundly unequal nonsense that is being created by this ill thought-out Bill and should attach that explanation to their election addresses when they begin the scramble for votes.”

Other party members blamed the gay “marriage” plan for the dashing of Tory hopes in a recent important by-election in the Hampshire town of Eastleigh. The Conservative candidate for Eastleigh, Maria Hutchings, came third behind the Liberal Democrats and the libertarian UKIP.

Tory MP Stewart Jackson commented, “This is the price that has to be paid for gay marriage because of the drastic unpopularity of it with activists and supporters, who have been less inclined to get out and campaign on the streets because of it. The issue has been a direct recruiting channel for UKIP, and there’s anecdotal evidence across the country for UKIP.”

After the Eastleigh loss, UKIP leader Nigel Farage said the loss was due to Cameron’s “obsession” with the issue: “The Conservatives failed here because traditional Tory voters look at Cameron and they ask themselves ‘Is he a Conservative?’ and they conclude ‘No, he’s not’.”

The party has lost the support of large donors and has seen a nosedive in local party association memberships as well as resignations of senior activists.

1 Response to “Gay ‘marriage’ bill will dissolve the glue holding society together: former Archbishop of Canterbury”

  1. 1 Phil

    If I might make a few observations. 1). There is a time and a place for the ‘gay’ marriage issue and the time and place is probably where you have placed it. What is not to the fore in this matter and perhaps could be brought to the fore, is the practical or pragmatic side. If we might draw a parallel. The vilification case brought against the two Danny’s is almost universally held to be the outcome of flawed and unworkable legal drafting. Issues of religion, politics, and ideaology are notorious for dragging the legal profession into quagmires. It is obvious as a matter of intuitive common sense that attempting to legislate sensitive items of human conduct and ideaology is bound to lead to an impasse. The creation of embryo’s/infants in any way other than that ordained by God and natural according to Nature around us is so legally problematical, no administration with an ounce of foresight would touch it. All that would be required would be a mood change, and suddenly, the government of the day, even if it had played no part in the manufacture of purchase-on-whim babies, could be up against multi-billion dollar lawsuits. Adoption is an extremely sensitive matter – even if done through humane, common sense procedures. Same sex ‘marriage’ as a technical category sooner or later must be struck down according to common sense legal procedure. As for the morality of ‘purchase off the shelf babies’ – if there is no provision banning it under some universal convention, RUA would in my opinion do itself no harm in writing international lobbying on this matter into its policy. Avoid targeting homosexuality, rather, target human rights!

    2). The current government by its own admission has lost the plot economically – and people out there are worried. Economics interests people – other items tend to take second place. Our ABC does publish useful figures on the ‘net.
    Don’t quote me but I think the annual interest bill on the Federal spending hangover is at least twelve thou mill (‘billion’) and might soon be twice that??? In other words, without sense returning to the economy, our interest bill could soon exceed education or some other major budgetary item. There are plenty of negatives hiding over the horizon in the economics department. The Bible advizes us to ‘owe no man anything’. One of the biggest spending items is pensions and aged care and strangely enough this is where a church related movement could perhaps muster some support and co-operation. All that ‘social gospel’ and all that feel-good-inside ‘socialism’ might just be able to be tapped to get more efficient and practical aged and sick care – whist somehow reducing spending?
    As for Australia’s best path forward economically and environmentally – Sweden is worth looking at, with its careful management. I think our population is already greater than the environment here can sustain and since our population to date only grew via immigration, and RUA has called for drastic reduction in certain areas of immigration ……… . And we do have reserves of natural gas, uranium, skilled workers and other obvious resources which if approached intelligently could see us becoming a better model economy than Sweden. The immediate challenge could well be to pull us back from the economic brink, if various possibilities eventuate. I would not be painting a rosy picture of real personal income any time soon and I would be making noises about needing to take strong and perhaps disconcerting action. Put simply, Australia spends far in excess of its income – and the difficulty for a compassionate Party is that thousands upon thousands of millions of dollars are going towards keeping up an appearance of care for vulnerable and disadvantaged groups, especially the sick and aged.

    3). Tony Abbott has said he will turn the boats around in international waters. Technically, that is piracy. Technically, lots of things are piracy. In reality, lots of legal things are piracy – not least of which is socialism, gone to seed. Could you back him up, and advize him to go several steps further: advize him to get Australia more intelligent as to who we allow into the country and especially which ’refugees’ we allow into the country, and get even more intelligent and give persecutors and anti-Australians such as Faiz Mohammed the choice of a free ticket to anywhere will take him, or a firing squad? Perhaps omit the firing squad but that is precisely what a court marshall should be about – and we are in a global war. When there is war, people and nations are being killed. People and nations matter. We are advised that ‘a generation arose which knew not war’. Those generations went backward. Until we get a war mentality and war thinking and war attitudes, we shall miss it as a nation. In war, every dollar and every effort goes towards winning. Every luxury is examined. The economy and many other items require this approach, to avoid defeat. Of course, the big item is spiritual war, of which in which I myself am not even novice standard.

    As I mentioned previously, world Science is in a form of ‘gobsmacked’ limbo. Education follows from Science. The world, if it is looking to anyone, is looking to RUA. It is certainly not looking to Islam. Science enthusiasts are notorious for being lousy preachers. They can also tend to be a cream of society. I will send you details of my educational backup as soon as in its full commercially available form – if the world economy staggers on until then. P.H.


Leave a Reply

Youtube Highlights


3K2 theme by Hakan Aydin