Friday 27 April 2012

Gay Marriage

I have just found that the famous (and lovely by the by) author, Armistead Maupin (Armistead Maupin on facebook), has posted a link to an advertisement for marriage equality for gays & lesbians. It speaks for itself, so here it is: "beautiful-british-gay-marriage-commercial" .

Some folk believe that the Bible interdicts homosexuality. Well, as the word was only created at the end of the C19th (1897 to be precise) that would seem a tad rich. There are only four (yes four) passages that are supposedly anti-homosexual and Jesus himself never even mentioned the topic. That's right, Jesus the Christ, the basis of Christianity, did not have a single word to say on the matter. However, selective fundamentalists pick and choose which bits of the Bible they are going to follow.

If one reads Deuteronomy chapter 22 verses 13 to 21, one discovers that under the old covenant a marriage was only to be considered valid if the wife (note not the husband!) was a virgin. If it transpired she was not a virgin, the marriage was invalid and the wife was supposed to be executed. Well apart from the sexism and hypocrisy involved, that would make a hell of a lot of marriages invalid and we should have to kill a heck of a lot of womenfolk!

Well, even if we ignore what the Bible might or might not say on the subject, there is the thorny issue of Church tradition. We are told by Roman Catholics and Anglicans (Episcopalians) that traditionally the Church is anti-homosexuality and that marriage is just for one man and one woman. Ahem, actually that is not quite true. There is quite some evidence to demonstrate that the Church from at least the C6th to C18th was blessing same-sex unions (mainly male, but there are some female rites).

For Church precedence see inter alia:

Kontakion to Saints Serge & Bacchus, C6th, Greek
Office of Same-Sex Union, C10th, Greek
Office of Same-Sex Union, C11th, Greek
Prayer for Same-Sex Union, C11th, Greek
The Order for Uniting Two Men, C11-12th, Slavonic
Office of Same-Gender Union, C12th, Italo-Greek
Order for Solemnization of Same-Sex Union, C13th, Greek
Office of Same Sex (sic) Union, C14th, Serbian Slavonic
Agreement of "Brotherhood", C15th, Latin
Office for Same-Gender Union, C16th?, Greek
Office of Same-sex (sic) Union, C16th, Greek
The Order of Celebrating the Union of Two Men, <C18th, Serbian Slavonic

The Vatican purged its library of Latin texts, but omitted to destroy documents in other languages: hence the apparent lack of Latin evidence. Yes, it's probably now dawning upon one that there has been a mass cover-up. It's political of course. The Church in times of trouble has often needed a scapegoat: witches, Jews, homosexuals, etc. Now what is the major issue at the moment - pædophile priests. So the Church needs to go on the attack to deflect attention. It has acted thus for centuries.

I happen to be a pantheist and a Quaker. Quakers would actually like to marry same-sex couples in their places of worship, as would other smaller Christian denominations along with some Jewish groups.

If you would like to support equal marriage, then please sign AVAAZ's petition (Support gay marriage in the UK)



  1. I'm enjoying your blog and welcome to the blogosphere! You're even inspiring me to get back writing on mine. I'm not in the UK but in North Carolina, USA, and just voted today (early voting) against a NC amendment to define the only legal domestic union in this state as being a marriage between one man and one woman, period. I wish I could say I was hopeful about it going down, but sadly I don't have that much confidence in my fellow Tar Heels to vote no for this Amendment One; I hope I'm pleasantly surprised. It not only affects gay couples, and if this passes, then it could help give the momentum to change the law that makes gay marriage illegal already anyway, but also effects heterosexual couples who live together but aren't married, and all the children thereof.

    Sharon :)

    1. Thanks Sharon, for both your comment and for being the very first person to comment. One has to remain optimistic, methinks: even if legislation passes now, it does not mean it cannot be cast down at a later date. Stay hopeful! %)