Privilege

I don't have the statistics, but I'd be willing to wager that 99.9% of all people who support 'gay marriage' were raised by a man and a woman, that is, a mother and a father.

Perhaps not all had a privileged unbringing (certainly not as privileged as David Cameron's) and perhaps not all have been so privileged to have been raised by a mother and a father, through death or absence, but it is by this human relationship that their being came about.

Perhaps if all these 'equality' fanatics had actually been raised in homosexual relationships or lesbian relationships, the strength of feeling among trendy types for 'gay marriage' would be a little less, but hey, I guess under Dave's plan we'll just have to leave it a generation or two to see how the plan works out in the long run.

All of these people were raised by mothers and fathers

It is said that David Cameron and his friends in the Bullingdon Club and, presumably, also, George Osborne and his friends would smash up bars and restaurants and then pay the repair bill later on. That was their idea of a good night out, I guess. Who's going to settle the bill once this social experiment yields forth its results?

 I suppose that even though Dave is 'embarrassed' about his Bullingdon Club days (well, boys will be boys!) he hasn't learned that smashing up stuff comes at a price. Perhaps there is no difference in George and Dave's minds between smashing up a bar or a restaurant in Oxford and smashing up Churches, marriage, family and society.

It strikes me that that all our political trendy types were born into great privilege - in stable, loving households, raised by a mother and father. They never wanted for anything. Being a 'hell-raiser' in the Bullingdon Club is, I suppose, also a sign of great privilege. It's a privilege and a tradition that Dave, George, and presumably Boris, too, desire to continue while they're in positions of political power long after their time at Oxford. They are used to 'high society' where stuff gets smashed up and the bill gets paid at the end of the night or the following morning. They don't comprehend that some things are worth treasuring - like stable, loving homes for children with mothers and fathers.

All of these people were raised by mothers and fathers

'Same-sex marriage' makes a mockery of marriage. It's the kind of innovation that could put heterosexual people off the idea of marriage because getting married is suddenly what homosexuals do. Not everyone wants to do the same things that homosexuals do. Putting what homosexuals do in homosexual relationships into the same league as what heterosexuals do in heterosexual relationships is terribly dishonest.

They are not the same thing. Patently. Therefore, they should not be treated as equal or placed in the same league. Even your most flamboyant homosexual who has had sexual encounters with women before settling on men will tell you that a man making love to a woman is doing something very different to a man who is having sex with a man. There is, despite the development of artificial contraceptives, a very real possibility - some would see it as a 'risk' - of getting a woman pregnant and creating new life.

Heterosexual relationships and homosexual relationships are not the same thing, so to say these relationships should be treated as the same, with the same marital union being 'consummated' is a twisted joke. That some choose one type of relationship over another is proof that they are not the same relationship - therefore an appeal that they should be treated as 'equal' or 'the same' should be rejected by any Government with common sense. For David Cameron, the Prime Minister, to pretend these are the same things may go down well with trendy liberals, but it is reckless and bad governance to put this liberal social myth down on statute. Maybe, deep down, these toffs would rather we all had sex with anyone but persons of the opposite gender. After all, we don't really want the common folk breeding, do we? Too many of them as it is, I guess.