Government’s failure to define gay sex results in calls to change law on consummation and adultery

The madness gets worse! The failure of the government’s lawyers to define gay sex has resulted in MP’s calling for changes to the law on consummation and adultery for normal marriage in order to avoid discriminating against homosexuals.

The Daily Telegraph reports:

The Government’s “Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill” was published on Friday outlining details of how a raft of existing marriage laws are to be amended to include same-sex couples. The only surprise in the bill was a clause making it impossible for gay or lesbian people who marry to divorce on grounds of adultery.

Lawyers and MPs said the distinction created inequality between heterosexual and homosexual couples in the divorce courts and could ultimately lead to the abolition of the centuries-old concept of adultery. It came after Government legal experts failed to agree what constitutes “sex” between people of the same gender. Gay couples will also be barred from having their marriage annulled on grounds of non-consummation for the same reason.

Previously the Coalition had signalled that the matter would be left to the courts to decide, potentially leaving the issue uncertain for years. But officials drafting the bill sidestepped the issue saying simply that adultery would only apply to people of different sexes.

Opponents say the decision shows how gay marriage could open the way for a wider reassessment of marriage laws, something they claimed could be a potential “Pandora’s Box”.

Protect the Pope comment: For months the politicians and gay activists have been dismissing objections from those defending the normal definition of marriage between a man and a woman saying that same-sex ‘marriage’ would have no impact on the traditional understanding of marriage. All they planned to do was bring equality into marriage.  But the publication of David Cameron’s same-sex marriage legislation shows that as usual their reassurances meant nothing.  All along opponents of same-sex marriage have pointed out that homosexual ‘marriage’ was an absurdity because it could not be ‘consummated’. Now the government’s lawyers have proven the point by failing to agree a definition of that other nonsense ‘homosexual genital acts’. But instead of admitting the absurdity of same-sex marriage MPs are now proposing that as homosexuals can’t consummate marriages and can’t commit adultery, because there is no commonly agreed legal definition of gay sex, that both consummation and adultery as grounds for divorce must be dropped from marriage legislation altogether to avoid discriminating against homosexuals. This is the logic of the mad house.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9830044/Gay-marriage-Catholic-Church-tells-priests-time-to-act-is-now.html

 

14 comments to Government’s failure to define gay sex results in calls to change law on consummation and adultery

  • ms Catholic state

    What a hilarious farce. Don’t we have any comedian priests or committed Catholics that can send this bunch up?! And these are the people that laugh at the Victorians. Bwahahahahaaaa…..

  • ms Catholic state

    I said it before and I’ll say it again…..civil marriage is now practically meaningless. Priests should promote Catholic marriage like never before.

  • andy

    So the government might remove a ground for divorce which is something you disapprove of anyway and you still manage to complain. This isn’t about freedom religion or morals. It is about the Catholic church unhappy that it isn’t in charge of the civil law anymore. And thank god for that

    • Augustine

      Do you believe in God?

    • Dr Mark Thorne

      Since when was the Catholic Church last in charge of the civil law in the UK, Andy? Have you overlooked the fact that there has been an Established church in this country since the 16th Century that isn’t the Catholic Church? The Church fully endorses the separation of Church from State. Rather than any surrendering of power, the Church is speaking out against the destruction of the nuclear family (with the consequent deconstruction of the fabric of society), the abandonment of any objective value system against which Man measures and assesses his actions, and the overall cheapening of humanity. As Christ came to lead mankind into the fullness of what it means to be human, His Church has every right to speak out against the debasement of God-given structures and institutions. It was not the Church that has chosen to politicise marriage in this way, after all.

  • Rifleman 819

    I suppose the final dagger into this piece of nonsensical legislation will be when Treasury Counsel realise they have failed to take into account the status of consenting hamsters in any future same-sex-transgender-rodent relationships.

    But the sad thing is ….how many millions of pounds and 000s hours of taxpayer funded parliamentary and legal time have been squandered on a social group(if that is the most appropriate term?) that comprises 1.5% of the population?

  • Joseph Matthew

    If there is no homosexual adultery, this would mean that an open homosexual marriage would be legal. So three people can be married after all.And so we know that the real aim of all this is the abolition of marriage.

  • Lola

    Deacon Nick,

    Under Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill Schedule 3 — Interpretation of legislation:

    “(2) The following expressions have the meanings given—
    (a) “husband” includes a man who is married to another man;
    (b) “wife” includes a woman who is married to another woman;
    (c) “widower” includes a man whose marriage to another man ended
    with the other man’s death;
    (d) “widow” includes a woman whose marriage to another woman
    ended with the other woman’s death;”

  • Lynda

    There is no possibility of coitus or the marital act between two persons of the same sex. Two persons of the same sex CANNOT be married as a matter of fact and due to our nature as man or woman. Positive law CANNOT create marriage – it can only recognise it, and provide for some procedural matters to that end. The State CANNOT determine what marriage is. Marriage is a natural phenomenon necessary for human survival, welfare, and the family which is the basis of all community, all nations. Any law purporting to recognise disordered same-sex relations as marriage is necessarily invalid, for being irrational, unjust and harmful to the individuals and society at large, particularly the innocent, such as our children. Any law purporting to recognise and give status to a sexual relationship between two persons of the same sex is necessarily invalid and necessarily undermines the understanding of marriage, which the law reflects across many areas of the law. It is for the state to recognise marriage for the purpose of upholding and supporting it for the common good.

  • So much for ‘equality’! The sole reason advanced by David Cameron (would you buy double-glazing from this man?) for homosexual ‘marriage’ is equality. But does equality reside solely in the use of the term ‘marriage’ to cover relationships between heterosexuals and homosexuals? It appears so.
    Consider: heterosexual marriage can be nullified if there has not been an act of vaginal intercourse to consummate it – even if one or both parties heartily dislikes sex. By contrast consummation will not be required in a homosexual ‘marriage’. Unequal.
    Adultery is grounds for divorce in heterosexual marriage. It will be grounds for divorce in homosexual ‘marriage’ Hence, a partner in a homosexual ‘marriage’ can sleep around at will to the despair of his/her ‘spouse’ but the spouse will have no recourse on the grounds of having been ‘sexually cheated on’. It will not be relevant for divorce. Unequal.
    Civil unions will remain an option for homosexuals. They will not be, and have never been, offered to heterosexuals; indeed the government founght and won a case in the European Court of Human Rights against two elderly heterosexual sisters and spinsters who wished to enter a civil union in recognition of their lifelong devotion. Unequal.
    Two things become clear. The first is the surrender of the contemporary Tory party and most of civil society in face of Marxist ideas of ‘equality’ which now saturate every aspect of public and private life.
    The second is the gradual revelation of the real agenda which lies behind this push by the homosexualist lobby for homosexual ‘rights’ in all spheres (and here I think David Cameron and company are unwitting fellow-travellers rather than proponents)- it is the belief that the homosexual condition and ‘way of life’ are actually superior to the heterosexual condition and way of life.
    Get used to it – there is more to come, including lowering the age of consent (step forward Peter Tatchell!), the legalisation of children’s ‘sexual rights’ and therefore their commodification as objects for the legal gratification of adults’ sexual desires.

    • Eamon

      The Labour Party have proposed an review of opening civil partnerships to heterosexuals. So that can be dealt with later. In the meantime you lot need to get used to equality for LGBT people… its here, we queer get used to it. The Catholic Church is home to hundreds of self hating closeted homosexuals while privately enjoying gay sex (cd the head of the Catholic Church in Scotland! LOL) If the church like Jesus would have – embraced minorities the church would be far more like the person it claims was God. You attack this law as being unequal? I wonder are you seriously in favour of equality or just be pernickity… What is the “homosexualist” lobby? We demand equality. We dont believe we are superior or the heterosexual “way of life.” The brilliant thing is that the Commons voted massively for equality and tonight now the Lords have voted by another huge majority in favour of equality. Y

  • Lola

    Unreasonable behaviour will be ground for divorce for same sex activity whether the individual is heterosexual or homosexual. Same sex activity = unreasonable behaviour. There you go.

  • Nicolas Bellord

    It seems that adultery will still be grounds for divorce in both kinds of “marriage”. It is just that adultery is now defined as being between a man and a woman. Thus if one man in a same-sex marriage sleeps with a woman that is grounds for divorce but not so if he sleeps with another man. So adultery is only between a man and a woman but marriage is not.

    Further the law is being changed. If previously a man married a girl and it then turned out that she was really a man the marriage was void. Now it will not be void. So boys and girls be careful as you may be trapped into a SSM!

    A mad, mad world.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>