Homosexuals take Churches to court to force them to conduct same-sex marriages less than a month after legalisation

Barrie Drewitt and Tony Barlow have announced that they are taking legal action against the Churches to force them to conduct same-sex marriages.

Barrie Drewitt told The Essex Chronicle:

“I am still not getting what I want. The only way forward for us now is to make a challenge in the courts against the church. It is a shame that we are forced to take Christians into a court to get them to recognise us.  It upsets me because I want it so much – a big lavish ceremony, the whole works, I just don’t think it is going to happen straight away. As much as people are saying this is a good thing I am still not getting what I want.”

Barrie Drewitt said in December:

‘The government is attempting to enshrine discrimination in law against people just because they are gay. Like many couples, we look forward to being married in our local church, the same church, where our children were baptised. Now we are to be banned in law because we are gay, even if the vicar wanted to marry us. It’s not just about human rights; it’s about doing what is right?”

Protect the Pope comment: The legal advice to the Catholic Church and the Church of England before the legalisation of same-sex marriage by David Cameron was that both would be vulnerable to legal challenges from gay activists. Less than a month since the legalisation of same sex marriage and the first court case has already been announced.  Is David Cameron’s government going to fund the defence of the Church of England and the Catholic Church from such mischievous, publicity seeking, court cases? Or is this going to be the first of a series of legal challenges that are going to bleed dry the Catholic Church and the Church of England?



43 comments to Homosexuals take Churches to court to force them to conduct same-sex marriages less than a month after legalisation

  • freboniusthe2

    so much for david Cameron, just like ENDa life Kenny: lies lies and lies!

  • Steve D

    What a surprise! Everyone, of course, expected the loudest and most aggressive lobby in the country to accept that the Churches should be ‘given a pass’. The flimsy protection for Churches will be overturned within 12 months and the government can then feign dismay as was intended from the start.

    • Wake up England

      of course, when the going really gets tough (and it will) most bishops will fiddle nervously with their croziers and cave-in with a pitiful episcopal whimper.

      I bet NOT ONE of them is prepared to go to prison in defence of God’s Holy Law and the Catholic Faith.

      “St Vincent of Westminster, Bishop and Martyr” Just doesn’t ring true, does it?

      • Rifleman819


        “Blessed Kieran, of Arundel and the Bishops’ Conference, protomartyr of the Catholic Resistance”

        Arrested by Sir Peter Tatchell and Summerskill, pursuivant of the authorised Stonewall Agency established by the Act of Gender and Religious Supremacy 2020 AD.
        Imprisoned at the notorious Chevening Re-education Camp….and shot whilst trying to escape to the Catholic safe house at Stonor.

        Or perhaps not?

      • deacon David

        Mmm, I wouldn’t be too sure about this point ultimately.

  • Amanda Peter

    Maybe it’s time for all Christians to take to the streets like they have done in Egypt. Let all Christians start protesting which can destabilise the economy. Maybe the leaders on the countries will consider they gave gone a step too far. This has become a true war… For the soul of man. For religious freedom to love and obey Gods Word while they want to commit sacrilege in our churches.

  • Lynda

    If such an action were to be successful (and I can’t see how it could be under the current law), it would in effect mean that individuals such as this plaintiff would be recognised as having a right to change tthe doctrine of a religion in accordance with their desires should that change accord with a principle determined by the state in its laws. In effect, the doctrine of the religion could be changed to accord with the principles of the state authorities for the time being. That is total dictatorship – and so, the compelling of a minister of the church to “marry” any two persons would follow, as preposterous and absurd as that is. Such a regime would have thrown up the Rule of Law and such marriages could never be valid under the natural law, even if the two persons were of the opposite sex. Tyranny is absurd, as it denies reality, the true nature of the person.

  • Damask Rose

    Yep, just waiting to happen…

    Drewitt said:

    “I am still not getting what I want. It is a shame that we are forced to take Christians into a court to get them to recognise us.”

    The homosexual here tells the truth. The gays are desperate for Catholic/Christians, to accept homosexuality and its acts on a spiritual, supernatural and intellectual level. In a certain way, the Catholics/Christians are a stumbling block to the gays totally ACCEPTING WHO they are in their sinful state. Catholics/Christians are the ever-present still, small voice in their consciences. …and never the twain shall meet.

    ‘Like many couples, we look forward to being married in our local church, the same church, where our children were baptised. Now we are to be banned in law because we are gay, even if the vicar wanted to marry us. It’s not just about human rights; it’s about doing what is right?”

    This is a tragedy. How people have become so heathen in so short a time is beyond me. I’ll repeat: “…we look forward to being married in our local church, …where our children were baptised. …even if the vicar wanted to marry us. It’s not just about human rights; it’s about doing what is right?”

    No concept here of the tenets of the Christian faith at all. A complete failure on the part of clerics to pass on the faith, yes, even vicars. Just like the local Catholic Church and it’s fun “right of passage” First Holy Communion where kids learn nothing for 6 months and remain ignorant regarding the Blessed Sacrament and Confession after. It’s all about me, me, me; what I want. Another way to look at it is the impairment of logos due to endless hardened mortal sin.

    I think the Government isn’t going to give a damn about how many Christians loose their jobs and will become unemployable (oh yes, think references) due to “homophobic hate crimes” or Churches get harrassed by gays. I need’nt regurgitate the reasons as to why.

    Perhaps the vicar who can’t marry the gays will recommend them trying the local mosque or synagogue.

    • Michael Petek

      They don’t need to take me to court to get me to recognise them. I recognise them all right. They’re the couple who drove their range rover into a flooded road last year and had to be rescued by seventeen firemen.

      I laughed till I cried, when it occurred to me that, maybe, they drove into the water deliberately, and more than once.

  • Martin

    Of course the Catholic Church won’t go along with this. Maybe the odd dissident priest might do this, but then he will be excommunicated and laicized. Any future problems and we can just lock the church door. This is not difficult.

  • Andrzej

    Thank The Queen “FD”

  • Karla


    How many pro homosexual marriage advocates said lawsuits against Churches would never happen or that it is unlikely!? Weeks after the homosexual marriage legislation is signed and the first lawsuit against Church is here already.

    • Rifleman819


      It will be very interesting to see if NSS,BHA and Stonewall club together and pool funds to launch (initially) actions in civil law to press for gay nuptials in churches.

      The hidden agenda is actually obvious …to attempt to rub our noses in it.

      There will be no similar actions against mosque communities however-Woolwich is still fresh in the mind

  • Lola


    Unlike the Catholic Church, I cannot see how the CoE can argue their way out of this one in view of the above. In the same way that priestesses have become the Achilles heel, Anglicanism is now a cultural concept being that it has thrown all theological basis for its canons and will have to face the consequences for having done so. Even if they are able to obtain safeguards for specific members of their clergy on the basis of conscientious objection, I doubt they’d be able to safeguard their premises from hosting same-sex “marriage”.

    Read the Pink News article and was rather surprised by some of the comments against this couple.

  • This was always inevitable. The gay rights movement always works in increments. One year it’s civil partnerships, then marriages, then Churches etc etc. They won’t stop until they’ve got an unquestionable right to do whatever they like with a complete and absolute ban on any form of disagreement.

    What is the next step for Churches? The CofE will probably crumble, but surely we can’t? Surely we now have to deregister from performing the legal part of marriages and just do the Church/ Sacramental bit, like in France?

  • Here’s a piece from the Herald a week or so back making the same point: de-registering from civil marriages is the only option. We should do it now to avoid all the court costs:


  • Same old, same old

    The civil law in this country basically means that anyone can take anyone else to court. Before you all get in too much of a tizz and before you accuse anyone of lying, this will only be an issue if the courts find in favour of this couple.

    What would be really interesting would be if the churches and denominations that do want to be able to carry out such ceremonies took their issue to court. So much for religious freedom.

    • Rifleman819

      Same old ,

      Nonsense as usual.You will see that the two lovebirds are specifically targeting the CoE first and then the RCC.So your comment in the second half is a non-sequitur…as several fringe bodies are already planning to host charade ceremonies.

      This is an issue which directly confronts the Anglican communion and indirectly the Catholic church.

      Anglican rites are those of the Church by Law Established where an Anglican ministers is always “ex-officio” an officer of the civil state for registrations.

      This puts the Church of England into a potentially dangerous situation.

      It is , was and will be an Erastian creation since 1558.Its ministers sign up to the 39 Articles and swear an oath of fealty to the Crown and as several constitional lawyers have already pointed out -there will come a legal tussle when one Act/Acts of parliament (all the gay marriage/equality laws) clash with other parts of Acts and subsidiary legislation ( the constitutional position of the CoE).

      Could this be the opening shots in the war of Disestablishment?

      And how many would sign up to Anti-disestablishmentarism?(Simply had to get that in……..!)

  • Martin

    This is vexatious litigation. I cannot see how this action can succeed. This being so, and given Ministerial assurances that this would be so, the government should protect churches from having to bear the costs of defending such vexatious suits. Hopefully when the judge throws this out, he will also award all costs against the Drewitt-Barlows.

  • BJC

    I’m not sure they even need to legally challenge this. Its just a matter of time before the C of E give in anyway. Justin Welby almost seems to be preparing for it by inviting Stonewall into the schools. Next stop will be to try to get the Catholic schools closed down via breach of equality guidelines in sex-ed classes or using employment laws. If it wasn’t for the existence of Muslim schools I’ve no doubt it would happen within 5 years.

  • ms Catholic state

    Obviously motivated by sheer spite and hatred for Christianity, Christ, Catholicism and Catholics! Disgusting!

    • John Dare

      Her’e's a question for you Ms; given that it only takes one person out of two to be sensible and avoid a fight, who is going to grow up first?

      • ms Catholic state

        Those in the wrong of course! Those opposed to God and His laws.

      • Rifleman819

        John ,

        Ms Catholic state is merely defending Christian orthodoxy….not the “spirit of the age”. The next few years will see the legalisation of bestiality , I’m sure, as we discover the “personhood” of non- human species…then a few years after that animal/human civil partnerships…until at StWoofrum’s Church , Hound Lane, Dogbury…..some Animal Rights activist will plight their troth with Sally ……then take her home to a wedding breakfast of Winalot and Chum-and the labrador looked radiant in her specially bespoke veil.

        We might smile now …it probably will happen -after all ….we all have rights , don’t we?

        • same old, same old

          I would accept your paranoid delusions if you will explain just one thing to me. How is Sally expected to plight her troth in return?

          You keep up with this nonsense that same-sex marriage will eventually lead to people marrying photocopiers etc etc ad (literally) nauseam. So let me ask the question in return. What in current legislation would you reverse. Should same sex marriage be outlawed? Should same sex relationships be made illegal? Should Catholic registrars be allowed to refuse to marry divorced people? Should divorce itself be made harder and/or illegal? Would the list end there?

          • Rifleman819

            Same old ,
            Delighted to help-a question for you …if someone had brought up same sex marriage enforced by Act of Parliament in 1964, 1974 , 1984 , 1994 and even 2004…the notion would be laughed out of court…just as Call Me Dave may find when his Tory canvassers are thin on the ground at the next G Election.
            And sorry Same Old -we were assured by the gay lobby and their parliamentary friends that after civil partnerships -that was it …ho ..ho…just like Hitler after Sudetenland.
            Sally the labrador…will pledge her vows by burping and licking her human chum’s face with copious canine saliva.
            At the end of all this dystopian madness there is an entire society crumbling at the behest of less than 5% of the entire population…where will it all end …you may need to ask a Scotsman aboot that and to reframe all your questions….because if Alex Salmond gets his way there will soon be no UK left anyway.

        • John Dare

          Yes she is Rif and (nothing against her), amazingly badly. I’ve said elswhere, being ‘right’ is no defence. The other lad will think he’s right too. But you and I both know that life is about how you present rightness.

          As for the animals thing, you’re having a larf as ever. Good to know that someome on here can. Its all getting very puritanical :lol:

        • Wake up England


          How dare you be so Labradorist in your tone?

          I am immediately going to report you to B.O.L.L.E.C.S. (The British Order of Loony Labrador Equality Correctness Society).

          • Rifleman819

            For John and WUE,

            Ok …I ‘fess up….banged to rights really ….once I got a whiff of them near Bristol Zoo…I knew I was hooked…and they were such good Catholic gels too …….all suppleness and coy cocquettes…mad keen for my sardines…good Chilean Emperor penguins…vaguely clerical in dress and sooo…..alluring.
            The missus is none too keen though…..a menage a flipper is a bit racy for the west country , m’dear

          • Wake up England

            ppick up a ppenguin

  • Genty

    Well, let’s face it, the works – a Lady Diana wedding gown, etc. – doesn’t quite sit with a civil ceremony. I can see why they feel deprived.

  • Michael Petek

    “We are happy for gay marriage to be recognized – in that sense it is a big step. But it is actually a small step because it is something we still cannot actually do. We need to convince the church that it is the right thing for our community for them to recognize as practicing Christians,” Drewitt-Barlow told the Essex Chronicle.

    “I am a Christian – a practicing Christian – my children have all been brought up as Christians and are part of the local [Church of England] parish church in Danbury. I want to go into my church and marry my husband,” he said. “If I was a Sikh I could get married at the Gurdwara. Liberal Jews can marry in the synagogue – just not the Christians.”

    A practicing Christian!

    What a mockery!

  • ms Catholic state

    Gay ‘marriage’ is a thoroughly pagan concept. It’s got nothing to do with Christianity! Those who practise it are pagans.

  • David T

    Let the courts decide. Best way really.

Leave a Reply to ms Catholic state Cancel 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>