The closing date for submissions to the Scottish Government's consultation on redefining Marriage is Friday 9th December. You can take part in this on-line via the websites of The Scottish Government or The Christian Institute. Those have an interest and concerns about the changes being proposed should take the opportunity to make their views known.
Below is a slighly reduced version of a letter I have sent to my consistuency MP & MSP on the subject.
Dear Tom / Nicola
Scottish Government Consultation on Same Sex Marriage
I am writing to you on the above subject as a Christian Minister but also as a father and citizen...
The arguments against the redefinition of Marriage to include homosexual partnerships have been well made by groups such as ‘The Christian Institute’ and ‘Care for Scotland’. You will not be surprised that I share their concerns, and would want to express my own apprehension that a trans-political institution of a universal and historic nature (stretching back millennia) should be thought of as something for an individual government to redefine.
Indeed the move to redefine marriage seems wholly unnecessary as there is already provision for those who wish to legally bind themselves to one another in a Civil Partnership. Even if you have no issue regarding homosexuality it is obviously not the same as heterosexuality and therefore it is hardly discriminatory to recognise that difference. It seems that words are being manipulated to make ideological points – why not redefine the word ‘uncle’ to mean ‘cousin’ to suit those who are uncles but would like to be cousins?!
There are many other concerns that could be raised, both philosophical and practical. However, one major concern is the increasing sense of threat and imposition that Christians (dare I say, evangelical Christians) feel towards them in our society. That many Christians have little confidence that a redefinition of Marriage will not simply be the first step in ultimately forcing Christian Churches to conduct Same Sex Marriages should be no surprise. The Civil Partnership legislation was introduced with guarantees that they would remain an entirely secular provision – a few years later this consultation is underway with a view to legislating for them to be conducted in religious premises.
Christians are wise enough to know that their views on such matters are out of step with many in the political and indeed media world. We also realise that for many in wider society this is not an issue they necessarily feel strongly about. However, the right of people to practise their religious beliefs without imposition and threat is the cornerstone of a truly free society. It might be argued that Christians have not always extended such rights to others at times (including homosexual people) and that is something we must acknowledge. However the danger is that now ‘the boot’s on the other foot’ that such unfairness is simply perpetuated in the other direction.
Current trends in our society regrettably suggest that is the ‘direction of travel’. Recently I sat with a Bulgarian pastor at a conference in Hungary. As a young Christian in 1970’s Bulgaria he was not allowed to attend university because of his Christian beliefs. He was not alone in suffering such exclusion at that time in ‘Iron Curtain’ countries – many children from Christian families were denied education, selected out for extra Communist indoctrination or even removed from their parents. Sanctions taken because Christianity was deemed to be an unacceptable challenge to the prevailing political ideology.
In our own society we read about cafe owners being cautioned by the police for displaying Bible verses, and people being disciplined by employers for expressing reasoned disagreement with homosexual practise. A lovely Christian couple, I know of, who applied to be adoptive parents in Glasgow were, despite being cleared for adoption, subsequently ‘interrogated’ on several occasions regarding their views on homosexuality. Despite clearly stating they believed that all people should be treated with respect, tolerance and kindness, they were told informally that their Christian beliefs were going against them actually having children placed. They wondered, as I did, if had they been Muslims they would have had such scrutiny or been told their religion was a problem...
So as a Christian Minister, a father and one of your constituents can I ask you to use the influence you have to counsel against the redefinition of Marriage – and in doing so both uphold its historic and universally understood premise, and prevent a further move destined to alienate large numbers of Christians among others in our society.
Thank you for your time in this matter and for your hard work generally.
Yours sincerely
Andrew Hunter
Senior Staff Worker
Greenview Evangelical Church
3 comments:
This is a superb letter, Andy. Thank you for the time you have invested in its preparation. If reason prevails the legislation will remain intact. But that's a big "if".
Thank you for standing up...we also have this issue in the United States, and it is very sad to think of the implications behind redefining marriage! May God be with you always!
I am not sure how I stand on the issue of gay marraige, given that in the UK one in three, if not one in two, marraiges, ends in divorce. Though I don't know the average duration of marraiges that end in divorce. What should anyone say? Given the fragility of 'the gay community' why would anybody want to foist upon such a fragile people such a vast potential for emotional failure through divorce? Think of the stress.... It is a recipe for failure that has been well tested, as to how well it can fail, on heterosexuals already and there is no reason to think that the failure rate would be lower for gay men and lesbians. And yet that is what is being proposed. I would like to see proposed alongside gay marraige proposals far more stringent rules about divorce FOR ALL. Marraige should for life, however miserable two people can make each other under the law, my parents marraige was for life and horribly miserable. If we are going to publicly reform marraige then it had better be made more permanent, if not more happy, all round...
Post a Comment