Marriage menace???

More unreasonable rubbish is today being spoken against gay marriage with this: The Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales is stepping up its campaign against the government's plan to legalise same-sex marriage. In a letter being read in thousands of parish churches, the two most senior archbishops say the change would reduce the significance of marriage, and that Catholics have a duty to make sure it doesn't happen. Archbishop Peter Smith told the BBC a married couple and their children "forms the basic building block of a healthy society". (more here and here)
Why on Earth would allowing gay men and women to get married be any threat to heterosexual marriage? How would it or could it hinder the Catholic view of marriage as being between a man and a woman who want to procreate? Our society is more than big enough to accomodate different perspectives on marriage though apparently some religions and religious figures are not. It seems to me that their overreaction is much more of a threat to the institutions they say they value than gay marriage is. Take a look at some of the arguments on this issue:

Prayer piffle?

 A Devon town council acted unlawfully by allowing prayers to be said before meetings, the High Court has ruled....(full story here). An eminently sensible decision. What on Earth have councils been doing summoning all councillors to Christian prayers in council chambers? Some councillors are Christians, some are of  other faiths, some hold to no particular faith, whilst others have no religious faith at all - and the business of councils should not be rooted in religion. Councils are for everybody and the fact that prayers have been part of formal council meetings for a very long time is not an argument based on reason to continue doing so. The overreaction to this court decision from government and church representatives has been pretty silly. 

...Mr Justice Ouseley said: "A local authority has no power under section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972, or otherwise, to hold prayers as part of a formal local authority meeting, or to summon councillors to such a meeting at which prayers are on the agenda."

He told the court: "There is no specific power to say prayers or to have any period of quiet reflection as part of the business of the council."...

He told the court: "The saying of prayers in a local authority chamber before a formal meeting of such a body is lawful, provided councillors are not formally summoned to attend."...

A few other posts on religion here, here and here.

Archbishop’s fear of unruly demonstrations by the Protest the Pope campaign is ill-founded

Received via Facebook: Archbishop to meet Pope protesters...Catholic Church requested meeting...Post-meeting press conference at 12 noon Wednesday 8 Sept...on the pavement outside New Scotland Yard immediately after their meeting with the Catholic Archbishop of Southwark, Peter Smith.

The meeting has been called at the Archbishop’s request and with the approval of the Catholic hierarchy and Papal visit organisers.

In response to the Archbishop’s request for a “neutral” space, New Scotland Yard has agreed to host the meeting. It is being facilitated by Sergeant Nicholas Williams, head of the Met’s Communities Together Strategic Engagement Team.

The meeting will start at 11am, tomorrow, Wednesday.

The Archbishop will meet a delegation of Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, Andrew Copson, Chief Executive of the British Humanist Association and Marco Tranchino and Peter Tatchell of the Protest the Pope campaign.

“The Archbishop’s fear of unruly demonstrations by the Protest the Pope campaign is ill-founded. We plan no disruptions,” said human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell, who is also a spokesperson for Protest the Pope.

“When I meet him, I will advise the Archbishop that the best way for the Pope to avoid protests is by dropping his offensive, anti-humanitarian polices, such his opposition to women priests, gay equality, fertility treatment for childless couples and condom use to prevent the spread of HIV. Many people would also like him to reverse his decision to lift the excommunication of the holocaust denier, Bishop Richard Williamson.

“The Pope should apologise for his own personal failure to bring child sex abusers to justice and he should agree to hand over to the relevant police forces worldwide the Vatican’s sex abuse files.

“It is no use Benedict meeting victims of priestly sex abuse if he is not willing to hand over his own bulging files on clerical abusers.

“In 2001, when he was a Cardinal, the Pope wrote to every Catholic Bishop in the world, requiring them to report all child sex abuse cases to him in Rome. He cannot claim that he was unaware of the abuse that was happening. His letter did not urge the Bishops to report abusers to the police.

“As the Catholic theologian Hans Kung has said, the Pope bears co-responsibility for inaction and cover-up. That’s why he should apologise for his own personal shortcomings, instead of apologising for the behaviour of other clergy,” said Mr Tatchell.

More from:

http://www.protest-the-pope.org.uk/

http://www.secularism.org.uk/

http://www.humanism.org.uk/about