Cardinal Keith O'Brien Attacks Government's Gay Marriage Plans

First Posted: 04/03/2012 07:18 GMT Updated: 31/01/2013 22:06 GMT   PA

David Cameron faces fresh pressure from church leaders over the Government's plans for gay marriage. Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the leader of the Catholic Church in Scotland, claimed the proposals were "madness".

In an article for The Sunday Telegraph, he accuses the coalition of trying to "redefine reality".

The Prime Minister is a "passionate" advocate of the change, telling his party two years ago he supported gay marriage "because I am a Conservative".

Expectations are that the coalition will hold a free vote in the Commons at some point in the next year or so to allow same-sex couples to marry.

Cardinal O'Brien wrote: "Since all the legal rights of marriage are already available to homosexual couples, it is clear that this proposal is not about rights, but rather is an attempt to redefine marriage for the whole of society at the behest of a small minority of activists.

"Same-sex marriage would eliminate entirely in law the basic idea of a mother and a father for every child. It would create a society which deliberately chooses to deprive a child of either a mother or a father.

"Other dangers exist. If marriage can be redefined so that it no longer means a man and a woman but two men or two women, why stop there? Why not allow three men or a woman and two men to constitute a marriage, if they pledge their fidelity to one another?"

Earlier this week the Home Office defended the plans after Tory MP Peter Bone called them "completely nuts".

A Home Office spokeswoman said the Government believed that "if a couple love each other" and want to commit to a life together they should "have the option of a civil marriage irrespective of their sexual orientation".

Equalities minister Lynne Featherstone is due to launch a consultation on the plans later this this month.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK POLITICS

Filed by Chris Wimpress  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 974
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (9 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ben Wilson
Might as well laugh while you still can.
04:34 PM on 03/09/2012
I half expect to see lightning strike out from his fingertips. I know you shouldn't judge on looks, but i dont need to hear him speak to conclude he's a little bit evil...The costume doesn't help him either.
12:13 AM on 03/07/2012
It seems that straight people think that having heterosexual sex is the only kind of sex that is considered "normal" and "natural". Homosexual sex is natural sex for gays. So why does the heterosexual group get to claim superiority because they have "normal" sex just because it is heterosexual. When are straights going to realize that "normal" is subjective, and stop hating, tormenting, killing, and belittling people who are having the natural kind of sex that is normal to gays? C'mon hets--you think you own the word "natural"?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Linda Burris
single and loving it.
11:13 PM on 03/06/2012
I have noticed that those who say they are Christians do not act very Christlike. Christ preached love not hate, yet those very same ones who say they are Christians show more hate than anyone else. Why is that? They do not seem to practice what they preach.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KAYLEE BURRIS
54 ,FLA ,LOVING LIFE ,TRANS, LALL
07:15 PM on 03/06/2012
for those people who wish to play the ignorance card:
heres one for you:
why is it that the hetrosexual society creates us ,then they deny and catagorise us because of our differences,
It was you people who are the root cause of who we are.
you who degrade other people and children to 2nd class because you need someone to blame your mistakes and miserable lives on,
it is you religious hypocrites, who deny your own children the dignity of being human.
how many degraded children,must die till you people start taking responsibility?
08:52 PM on 03/06/2012
Well Ka.ylee ' those people' dont really create anyone, it is genetics which does that. And frankly I havent seen any minority group free of the usual prejudice. A person reading your post might not realsie that gays are not denied legal rights but that this is essentially a question about different forms of unions.
This comment has been removed.
06:10 PM on 03/05/2012
Cardinal Keith O'Brien is a silly old man who should learn to keep his incendiary and venomous marks about gays, marriage and the R.C. Church's right to interfere in UK politics to himself. In case he forgot there was an event called the Reformation.
08:48 AM on 03/05/2012
What about equality when giving blood ? answer please.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KAYLEE BURRIS
54 ,FLA ,LOVING LIFE ,TRANS, LALL
07:07 PM on 03/06/2012
cat they have approved LGBT's to be able to donate now,after the blood is fully screened.
10:58 PM on 03/06/2012
No....they have approved them IF they havent had sex for a year. So they havent really.
What normal person in a relationship is going to not have sex for a year just so they can donate blood? No one...

Heterosexuals dont have to abstain for a year.
08:04 AM on 03/05/2012
Why does an institution where paedohililia is rife feel that they can make moral and legal decisions for those who most likely aren't even a part of said institution? I guess the power they used to enjoy that allowed them to justify tortue and execution of homosexuals has slipped from them and their resentment leads them to make these last-gasp rhetorical statements.
08:04 AM on 03/05/2012
They should be put on an Island far away in order to practice their perversions. I am not homophobic; I am like a magnet that repels the correct Pole.
08:39 AM on 03/05/2012
Homosexuality is natural. More homosexuals are born in times of overpopulation. Sexual satisfaction without reproduction, another example of the awesome beauty and efficiency of nature. (And, yes you are a homophobe.)
08:58 AM on 03/05/2012
If your mother and father were not straight you would never have been created!
12:22 PM on 03/05/2012
Interesting observation that seems to be categorising sexual orientation as a population control device. Would that not suggest encouraging gay people to have children to be counterproductive ?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
arachne646
No more hurting people--Peace
04:26 PM on 03/05/2012
You don't have any evidence to back up your feelings. Sexual orientation to any gender is not a perversion, it is a normal variation.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KAYLEE BURRIS
54 ,FLA ,LOVING LIFE ,TRANS, LALL
07:40 PM on 03/06/2012
arachne good post F&F
This comment has been removed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Nathan0316
TrueBlueTory Age quod agis
02:35 AM on 03/05/2012
Edmund Burke said it best: "Nothing is so fatal to religion as indifference."

Or how about: "I take toleration to be a part of religion. I do not know which I would sacrifice; I would keep them both: it is not necessary that I should sacrifice either." Not words the Cardinal has heard before, I'm guessing!

Personally I find it abhorrent that the Church is claiming that just because gay people (or "people" as they're also known) have all the same legal rights in a civil partnership as they do in a marriage they shouldn't be allowed to marry. Can he not hear himself? He's actually advocating a "separate but equal" policy. Where have I heard that before? Oh, that's right, on another issue the Church decreed that changing would bring about the end of civilisation as we know it, that of civil rights for all, regardless of race.

In twenty years time, when the young ask us what all the fuss was about, these religious leaders will have no answer, just as they didn't for women's suffragette, civil rights or religious freedoms in public life.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Norman Mitchison
01:42 AM on 03/05/2012
Isa`nt it more important to have a vote on exiting the EU than Gay marriages?
07:55 AM on 03/05/2012
No.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thismortalcoil
Science is the poetry of reality
10:40 AM on 03/05/2012
Well said Eastwood, what could be more important than equality.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Agnt Duke
Just assume a #sarcasm tag
09:12 AM on 03/08/2012
So you'd rather be bound by society so long as you could be free in the bedroom? Don't you care what non-gays think about that? That opinion might be a reverse-hate magnet if you think about it.
10:54 PM on 03/05/2012
Too right.
01:25 AM on 03/05/2012
I'm fed up with the whole subject of "gay"marriage. If same sex couples want to live together or have civil partnerships, get on with it but don't keep shouting about it -I don't want to know'
"Gay marriage" is a travesty and a very long step too far. If Cameron insists on pushing it through he will have lost my vote for my lifetime and similarly I suspect the votes of many others.
07:54 AM on 03/05/2012
But they will attract many more votes from those who were perhaps put off by Section 28.
08:46 AM on 03/05/2012
Here, here, my thoughts exactly along with the majority.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paul Wagland
Resistance is fertile
10:46 AM on 03/05/2012
No, you're in the minority as many polls have proven.
01:13 AM on 03/05/2012
What is all the fuss about?
This comment has been removed.
11:20 PM on 03/04/2012
I have been asked for evidence which ref;ects my comments that the proportion of Catholic priests whio are gay is higher than in the general population :
" Despite this, evidence from several studies has shown that there are higher than average numbers of homosexual men (active and non-active) within the Catholic priesthood and higher orders; estimates presented in Donald B. Cozzens' book The Changing Face of the Priesthood range from 23-58%.[3]
Martin, James (November 4, 2000). "The Church and the Homosexual Priest". America

These priests have of course helped shape the attitude of the church towards women - maybe that is why gay women choose to distance themselves from gay men ???
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Nathan0316
TrueBlueTory Age quod agis
02:50 AM on 03/05/2012
The Church have long been known as haters of women, it's been estimated that they burned 3 million women at the stake as witches. Seems to me that there was almost certainly a strong element of self-loathing in priests who, unable to come to terms with their own sexuality (admittedly in a society where homosexuality was punishable by death), took it out on the women around them.

It could also be the case that, again bearing in mind the punishment for gay acts was the death penalty, it was easier for gay men to surrender to the Church and use abstinence as their reason for not having sex. I could be wrong, maybe they turned to God for help with a condition they saw as sinful but curable through prayer. We can't really understand them, as we will never know the pressure they were under, but should be glad we now live in a society where we've at least made as much progress as we have.
08:42 PM on 03/06/2012
Well i am sure some will argue with the claim that the Church are women haters. However the figure for women burned as wicyhes is probabky more like 30,000 or so . Unless i am wrong. However I understand the stats on gays are for the 20 th century so questions of death penalty would not have been applicable. However it is interesting to ask to hwat extent gay clerics did influence attitudes towards females. Ive noted before the distinctions between gay women and men and i wonder if there is such a thing as gender bases discrimination within the gay community.