Lesbian journalist Masha Gessen has admitted on US radio that homosexual activists are lying about their agenda to legalise same-sex marriage. She says that gay activists don’t want to access the institution of marriage, they want to so radically re-define it that eventually marriage is eliminated from society:
“It’s a no-brainer that (homosexual activists) should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. …(F)ighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there — because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie.
The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. And again, I don’t think it should exist. And I don’t like taking part in creating fictions about my life. That’s sort of not what I had in mind when I came out thirty years ago.
I have three kids who have five parents, more or less, and I don’t see why they shouldn’t have five parents legally… I met my new partner, and she had just had a baby, and that baby’s biological father is my brother, and my daughter’s biological father is a man who lives in Russia, and my adopted son also considers him his father. So the five parents break down into two groups of three… And really, I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality, and I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.”
Protect the Pope comment: When Christians in this country have argued that David Cameron’s plans for same-sex ‘marriage’ open the gates for polygamy and incest marriages the media and blogs have ridiculed these concerns as hysterical and groundless. Here we have a prominent homosexual activist admitting that she wants ‘marriage’ to be possible for five parents. Once the objective definition of marriage as the union of husband and wife rooted in the complementarity of maleness and femaleness is rejected by society to be replaced solely by the subjective criteria of ‘love’, any perverted form of legal union becomes possible.