“For me I can see and understand both sides of the debate
without being for or against either. I haven't signed either of the petitions
going around!! My personal opinion is that governments cannot change hearts and
laws simply rearrange problems rather than solve them. For example by
introducing gay marriage do we think it will solve the equality issue people
have in their hearts?
I also think the debate is less about the gay community more
about marriage. The best way that I can
explain this is through an example:
When I was in the Police I was issued a new style of shirt
for my uniform. Instead of the traditional white collared shirt I was issued a
black sports type t-shirt. The shirt was (and still is) black. However upon
issue, the shirt was called graphite. Graphite is not the colour of the shirt I
was issued. Graphite is a dark grey
colour. Upon further probing, Herts police didn't want to call them black for
fear of offending. There used to be racist group called the blank shirts with
whom they didn't want to associate with.
In my mind they simply changed the definition of a word
(graphite) to suit them in order to be politically correct and not offend.
That’s the way I see the debate. It's not about gay marriage;
it's about the definition of what marriage is.
If as a culture we're happy to change definition of such
fundamental words then fine, but I personally believe that this is the
argument: What is marriage? It is not an
attack on homosexuality.
If we don't have a solid definition of marriage then what's
to stop me challenging the system so I can have two, three or even four wives? Or marrying a horse? If
I’m not allowed to express myself in this why, am I being discriminated
against?
So that's where I stand: what is marriage. It's not about
equality it’s about a definition.”
No comments:
Post a Comment