Too much to ask?

By Diogenes (articles ) | Jun 10, 2006

The UK Telegraph reports on the latest Last Step in the Gay Anschluss:

New Government proposals on equality could require clergy to bless homosexual weddings or face prosecution, the Church of England said yesterday. It said the proposed regulations could undermine official teaching and require Christians to act against their religious convictions.

The Sexual Orientation (Provision of Goods and Services) Regulations will make discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation illegal in the same way as race or sex. They are designed to protect gays and lesbians from being denied "goods, facilities and services" on the basis of their sexual preferences.

Note the interesting use of the word "protect" above. Gays are to be protected from denials. Some of us can remember back when the absolutely, positively, world-without-end final plea was for The Right to be Left Alone.

1950: All we want is to be free to pursue relationships of our own choosing in the privacy of our homes. Is that too much to ask?

1965: All we want is non-discrimination in housing and jobs on the basis of sexual orientation. Is that too much to ask?

1984: All we want is a change in the statutes so we are not outlaws. Is that too much to ask?

1994: All we want is non-discrimination in housing and jobs on the basis of sexual activity. Is that too much to ask?

2001: All we want is a civil recognition of same-sex unions. Is that too much to ask?

2004: All we want is univeral recognition of same-sex marriage with attendant benefits. Is that too much to ask?

2006: We demand that ministers of whatever faith who refuse to marry us be prosecuted.

So boys & girls, when the time comes that we Christians ask for the privilege of an exception -- i.e., exemption from prosecution -- in order to act in conformity with our religious beliefs, how generously do you imagine we'll be answered?

Sound Off! supporters weigh in.

All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

Show 7 Comments? (Hidden)Hide Comments
  • Posted by: Eleazar - Jun. 13, 2006 7:12 AM ET USA

    Spot on, Benedictusoblatus. And the best part of that is we didn't have to be divine to call in the fire mission.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 12, 2006 5:10 PM ET USA

    Eleazar ... you are right. But "Hellfire" missiles are pretty good at putting tanks out of action wherever they strike. When hellfire puts the queers out of action it is, unfortunately, too late to save them from their perverse folly.

  • Posted by: Eleazar - Jun. 12, 2006 10:24 AM ET USA

    I stand with Centurion. By the way, the best way to defeat a tank is not to attack its armor…the best way to defeat a tank is to blow the treads off.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 11, 2006 11:27 AM ET USA

    Perversion not conversion is the cry! I have a problem dealing with men who think they are women, and women who think they are men. Or who simply would like to be what they are not. They lack an ability to deal with reality. Modern science can do many things but not even it can make a complete change possible. As Catholics we must draw a line in the sand on this issue. We must follow God's law as revealed in Scripture and taught by the Church. No more concessions to the homosexual lobby.

  • Posted by: - Jun. 10, 2006 1:01 PM ET USA

    The Church was in a better position to hold back the barbarians at the gates about 50 years ago. Since that time, the official Vatican line has touted the importance of religious liberty and the "rights of man" rather than promoting the rights and honor of God. Well, now this openness to the world and its errors is having the unintended effect of making the world a worse place. You have to be willing to tell the queers seeking Church "weddings": "it will send you to HELL, NO."

  • Posted by: - Jun. 10, 2006 8:42 AM ET USA

    Diogenes, and others with legal expertise, please continue to address the present dynamic of increased governmental intrusion into matters of social behavior (freedom of association) and private property (eminent domain). Could this be considered an over-correction (hoisting on our own petard) after centuries of excessive focus by church authorities on government, at the expense of focus on personal salvation? I like our beloved departed Holy Father's admonition to "propose, not impose."

  • Posted by: - Jun. 10, 2006 2:01 AM ET USA

    Perfect post. Civilization is heading down the Hershey highway.