Equal Love

This morning the European Court of Human Rights heard an application to end the bans on Gay Marriage and Heterosexual Civil Partnerships in the UK. I have never quite understood the argument against Gay Marriage. I think it's got something to do with gay love not being as pure as heterolove, right? Those gays would get it all wrong and corrupt our precious institution. Except that doesn't sound true at all. In fact it sounds kind of insulting. I guess it's to do with parenthood and child raising then. Maybe there needs to be a separation between Marriage and Partnerships since it's illegal in Europe to have children outside of wedloc- No, wait, wrong again. Maybe it's because the bible defines marriage as between one man and one woman, though I highly doubt that in a secular society like Great Britain's the law would choose religion over human rights.

I just don't see it. Personally I find the term marriage to be full of religious connotations and I'd rather have Civil Partnership or Civil Union be the only legal term for these two identical situations. Christians and others could still hold big church weddings and declare themselves married, but that would all be flavour, not law. I suspect most people would still favour the term Marriage.

I wanted to look up non-religious arguments against gay marriage so I turned to wikipedia, where facts are laid out straight and bias is non-existant but the page for LGBT Rights Opposition has very little to say about the non-religious kind. A statement that some undefined people don't think children should be exposed to LGBT issues and some data suggesting that LGBT persons on average suffer from poorer mental health than their hetero neighbours, likely because those neighbours bullied and harrassed them. Okay, that first bit is crap possibly with religious motivation and that second bit is believable but the bullying only occurs because the LGBT community are treated in the eyes of the law as well as public opinion as different, as proved by having a seperate Civil Union law for them. Lets change those laws, gradually public opinion will follow and eventually everything will get better for everyone forever.

I am ignoring the religious arguments because religion should not influence the law, not on a rights issue like this, but lets say the law is changed, does that mean Churches should have to officiate gay weddings? This is where I start having to question my beliefs. I don't think governments have the right to tell people what to think. How to act maybe, but our thoughts, our likes and dislikes, our beliefs and faiths are the core of who we are and should not be changed by force even when they make us hateful Fred Phelps style homophobes, twisting a message of goodwill for our own disgusting agendas.

I have to look at the recent court decision against the christian B&B owners Hazelmary and Peter Bull, who turned a couple away after discovering they were gay. They were found guilty of discrimination and I agree with the court's decision. The Bull's beliefs shouldn't be weighed too heavily in this case, it's their actions that are important here but is refusing to officiate a wedding the same as refusing to provide accommodation?

Marriage with all it's rituals, rights and rites has long been considered a large part of religion's role in society. I've not read it cover to cover but I don't think the bible has much to say on owning a Bed and Breakfast. Christian Innkeepers, yes - they should all keep a small stable out back just in case - but nothing on B&Bs. Asking to rent a room for the night does not and should not compromise anyone's religious values but asking to be married in the laws of their faith does.

For the record, Majority Of The World's Religions, I think you're wrong but if the LGBT community agree not to force you to perform the ceremony until you're ready, can't you just let them call it marriage?