George Hell, his grub of the most high in the catholic church has been crowing like Â a chook that needs its head cut off as it’s stopped laying. Â He likes that some French folk are against marriage equality.
France is different, known for its food and wines, beautiful countryside, and the French Revolution (1789) with its principles of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, which changed the world. The French think differently. They love ideas.
Really? Â That’s an opening line? Â The French think differently? Â To what, dolphins? Â Last time I checked Australians loved ideas too. Â Australia also has food, wines, beautiful country side and the Eureka Stockade. Â Ok, I’ll give you the French Revolution, but only because people lost their heads.
The Minister for Justice let the cat out of the bag when she told the cardinal that “what is at stake is a reform of civilisation”. He agreed, saying the change would redefine humanity, the roles of men and women and procreation.
How will it redefine humanity? Â How would theÂ redefinitionÂ of marriage to include all couples change the role of heterosexual couples having babies? Â It simply won’t. Â Gay couples already live together, have families and generally get on with everyone else. Â Most of them already call themselves married. Â Simply changing marriage rites to include them will not bring the world to an end. Â What it will do is call into question the authority of men in fancy dress living in luxuriousÂ accommodationÂ while spouting bullshit.
He made no appeal to Bible teaching, saying the issue touched the nature of human life. Unlike us, who concentrate on the small number of couples who would enter homosexual marriages, or the short-term practical consequences, many of the French from both sides of the fence realise basic issues are at stake. They know ideas are powerful and will be taught in schools to the next generation.
Does Hell think only the French teach powerful ideas to the next generation? Â I guess what he’s saying is that schools will probably include in their classes information about people being diverse. Â That rather reflects reality.
Â On November 17 hundreds of thousands marched through the streets of Paris and a dozen other cities supporting traditional marriage.
As is their right. Â But rights are not determined by the size of crowds. Â My rights, and your rights are not up for the popular vote. Â Most Australians are not catholic, therefore we should legislate that catholics are not entitled to get married.
The uprising was led by a gossip columnist Frigide Barjot, the socialist Laurence Tcheng from a movement called The Left For The Republican Marriage, and an atheist homosexual Xavier Bongibault, founder of a movement called More Gay Without Marriage.
Not everybody wants to get married, and that’s ok. Â But why would anyone stand in the way of others getting married? Â That simply makes no sense. Â Then there is the ‘uprising’ issue. Â It’s a bit of an insult to the many millions of people who do rise up against their government and suffer for it. Â Think of the middle east as the latest example. Â In this case people marched to protest, the government was not overthrown, and the army was not dispatched to quell the masses. Â It isn’t an uprising.
The feminist philosopher Sylviane Agacinski, wife of a former socialist prime minister, strongly criticised those who claim sexual differences are not founded in nature, but simply ways of thinking, cultural constructs.
There’s a call to authority. Â Not happy with allowing a woman to be able to stand in her own right, Hell has to mention that she is married to a former French PM. Â It’s very important to him. Â She’s a philosopher and everything! Â How impressive. Â But she was also married to a man who was the PM. Â And look, she strongly criticises sexual differences, probably doesn’t support marriage equality!
The Chief Rabbi of France, the mufti and even the foreign spokesman of the Russian Orthodox Church joined the fray to defend marriage.
There’s a line for you. Â The rabbi is capitalised, the Russian is, but the mufti isn’t. Â Not even a mention of his mosque. And now it’s a fray. Â I love a good fraying.
All the parties know what is at stake.
When are you going to articulate exactly what is at stake? Â Grand words, but nothing at all about how things will change if gay couples can get married. Â In fact, apart from filling space, just what was the point of the article?
Must be a quiet news day.