“Consultation” With Progressives

Arthur McGeorge is a bus driver from Consett working for Go North East. Like many he made the error of thinking that in this country we have freedom of speech. He realised this when he took a petition opposing the government’s plans for same-sex marriage to work. During his break he asked his workmates if they wished to sign it. This is a petition already signed by more than 125,000 people.

As a result he has been threatened by his manager with disciplinary action. He has also been accused of ‘homophobia’ the pretend crime committed by anyone who dares question the prevailing orthodoxy. He has also been ordered to apologise for the offense he has caused. Clearly bus drivers in the North East of England are of more delicate sensibilities than most Geordies the rest of us have encountered.

Mr McGeorge has seemingly caused huge offense by asking for asking his workmates to sign a petition which says that marriage is “the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.” A statement which accords with the law of the land if not with the progressive authoritarians who control so much of our country.

A manager asked Mr McGeorge to promise not to bring the petition back to work. Mr McGeorge’s response was ”I’m not prepared to be told what I can discuss in my breaks.”

The government has just launched a “consultation exercise” on same-sex marriages. The Prime Minister David Cameron tells us he is “passionate” about legalising same-sex marriages.

Home Secretary Theresa May assures us that the government is determined to legalise same-sex marriages.

Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone has accused churches of “fanning the flames of homophobia” and basically told the churches to butt out in the discussion of same-sex marriages. She has given “a cast iron guarantee that homosexual marriage will be law by the 2015 election.

Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maud has stated that “In government we will legislate to introduce same-sex marriage.”

Not much “consultation” going on there.

We should not lose perspective on this. This is not the most anti-Christian government we have ever had. Even their decision to oppose the right of Christians to wear a cross at work is not anti-Christian. If only it were.

Instead of being anti-Christian the government, as do all progressives, think that Christians are irrelevant. We can be ignored, or bypassed by giving a few bishops and other church leaders a pat on the head.

The “consultation” is merely a window dressing exercise. This does not mean that it should be ignored. It is incumbent on Christians to seize every opportunity to make our voice heard.

In the sixties we were assured that abortion would only be practiced for medical reasons. Today we have abortion on demand and Christian medical personnel can be disciplined for refusing to participate in abortions.

Forgive me if I appear to be cynical, but experience can teach us a great deal. It does not take someone with the gift of prophecy to predict what will happen. We will be given assurances that ministers or priests will not be compelled to officiate at same-sex marriages. Does anyone really trust such assurances? Bitter experience tells us that when progressives have the power they are ruthlessly totalitarian.

Just ask a bus driver in Consett.

Advertisements

About Campbell

Now retired but once upon a time a parish minister in Glasgow, before that the South West and initially the Black Isle. Been a prison chaplain and lecturer. Still am constantly bemused by the weird world around me.
This entry was posted in Homosexuality and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to “Consultation” With Progressives

  1. What the hell does the government have to do with marriage? What is the purpose of a marriage license anyway? Why are we all so desperate to have our particular unions blessed by government? Government at any level should not favor one type of union over another. Marriage is an oath/allegiance/commitment between people traditionally of religious origins and to invite government into that relationship is giant step towards tyranny. If government can say who is married and who is not and use that as a condition to advantage some at the disadvantage of others , or to enrich some at the expense of others, then what part of our lives do we hold private and off limits to government? What then is the definition of Liberty?

  2. To me the bigger issue and the real problem is that there is too much government period. Not that government is favoring the wrong people or wrong lifestyle or wrong economic group it is simply doing too much period. Rather than ask why is gov supporting this side or that, we should ask why the hell are they involved in the first place.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s