Law Society prevents free speech
Christian Concern (CC) and the World Congress of Families, along with the National Organisation for Marriage, held their marriage conference as planned, this May, but only finding a venue less than 24 hours before the event.
The colloquium had been cancelled by the Law Society for allegedly breaching its ‘diversity policy’, despite strong letters of protest from leading barristers and judges.
The event was then moved to the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre, which is government-owned.
However, the day before the conference was due to begin, the Queen Elizabeth II venue also banned the event — for ‘diversity’ reasons — despite legal efforts by Christian Concern. The conference eventually met in a Westminster hotel.
CC’s chief executive, Andrea Minichiello Williams, said, ‘Concerns have been raised by many that supporting marriage between one man and one woman, which is still the current legal definition of marriage, is now considered “homophobic” by those pursing the “equality and diversity” agenda.
‘This suggests that potential restrictions on religious liberty and freedom of speech are likely to be extremely severe if same-sex marriage is actually introduced as the law of the land’.
National problem
During the colloquium called ‘One man, one woman: making the case for marriage, for the good of society’ (details on www.christianconcern.com), speakers with different views considered the case for traditional marriage, in the light of the Government’s proposal to extend marriage to same-sex couples.
One of the many speakers was Edmund Adamus. He said, ‘The decline of marriage is a national problem and successive governments in the UK have not given marriage the support it needs.
‘One of the reasons why there is such a loud clamour for same-sex marriage is because we have failed even in the church and faith communities to cherish true marriage adequately and visibly’.
Phillip Blond, Director of Res Publica, made this surprising point: ‘Same-sex marriage is a threat to homosexual difference. It is anti-gay and aggressively hostile to homosexuality, just as it is equally antithetical to heterosexuality and a properly figured heterosexual practice.
‘Modern equality attempts to force uniformity on different types of relationships, undermining both heterosexual and homosexual relationships. Instead of respect for the different and an attempt to legislate for the protection of that difference, modern progressivism demands the elimination of that distinction’.
Word of God
Sharon James, spokeswoman for the Coalition for Marriage, said the Government had changed the meaning of the word ‘consultation’ since Lynne Featherstone MP gave a ‘cast-iron’ guarantee that same-sex marriages will be introduced.
After the conference, many delegates attended a debate at Portcullis House, hosted by the Bow Group, on whether same-sex marriage should be introduced.
Far more significant than any human debate is the teaching of the Word of God, upholding marriage between one man and one woman as the only valid marriage (Genesis 2:23-24).
