[SOURCE].
Peter Jensen is another one of these self important people with a fancy title that you have to refer to as your grace on account of him being archbishop of Sydney’s anglican christian virus centre. Â He uses his position of self-entitled rank to push out his version of the truth and expects that everyone will jolly well sit up straight and say “Yes, your grace, how silly of us, we will now do it your way”
He’s now telling everyone off for even thinking that marriage equality is a good idea.
Dr Jensen said the present law did not deny the rights of those in same-sex unions. ”This is not unjust – it is not even discrimination in the current sense of the word – but a refusal to call different things by the same name,” he said.
So, if someone wants to get married to their partner of their choice (and possibly of the same sex) they don’t have that right. Â The current law as established by the Australian government clearly denys the right to same sex couples. Â It is unjust and it is discrimination, and I’m not at all sure what warped meaning of the word you have. Â What a crock.
Some of the unwelcome consequences of same-sex marriage would be the undermining of the family unit and a demand for equal treatment in sex education, where ”the normalisation of homosexuality” would be assumed.
Unwelcome consequences? Says who? How will it be undermined?  All those children with same-sex parents will in fact be strengthened by full recognition of the importance of relationships, regardless of sexuality.  Homosexuality is quite normal, men wearing strange hats and silly clothes isn’t so normal.
”This claim for a right to be married could open the way for other forms, such as polygamous marriages or perhaps even marriage between immediate family members,” he said.
Why not recognise polygamous marriages? Â But it’s not clear why allowing marriage equality would lead to polygamous marriage. Â As for marriage between immediate family members, I don’t want to marry any of my siblings, male or female. Â In any case, why are you telling us who we can or can’t have a relationship with?
”Ministers of the Gospel will find it increasingly difficult to teach Christian sexual ethics… since what they say will be contrary to what the state says,” he said.
Sexual ethics? Â The bible is full of crappy sexual ethics.
Peter Jensen gives another bishop a hug and a kiss
Genesis 19Â 8Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.
Do you teach that sexual ethics now? Â It’s ok to offer your virgin daughters up for gang rape? Â Some footy teams would love that ethic.
Further along:
35And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose.
36Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father.
37And the first born bare a son, and called his name Moab: the same is the father of the Moabites unto this day.
38And the younger, she also bare a son, and called his name Benammi: the same is the father of the children of Ammon unto this day.
Incest by sneaky fuckers. Â Great ethics.
”It imposes, through social engineering, a newly minted concept of marriage on a community that understands it in quite another way.”
A great example of the church ‘leaders’ dictating which parts of their precious book they wish to use to engineer the rest of society in their own image and ignore reality.  The church and compliant governments have been socially engineering for millennia , and it’s time it was stopped.  We can start by howling at Jensen and ask him if he has ever wanted to fuck an angel.
Â