Latest from UKIP Daily

Warnings ignored and same-sex marriage

You can call a giraffe a horse. But that won’t make it a horse. It remains, simply and accurately, a giraffe.

Some might argue: “Why can’t it be called a horse? A giraffe is an animal. It has four legs, a head, a neck and a tail. Surely, it’s a horse. What more do you want?”

They might even demand that, in the name of ‘equality’ and ‘in all fairness’, a giraffe is fully entitled to be, and indeed from now on must be, called a ‘horse’.

What has this got to do with UKIP and same-sex marriage?

I believe UKIP needs to learn lessons from the impact of same-sex marriage and to recognise its role in the larger Cultural Marxism agenda. As the activists work to break down society incrementally, every concession we grant them is of vital significance. Same-sex marriage legalised the idea that things which are demonstrably different are the same, and opened the door to future nonsensical policies. The latest of these is the proposed reform to the Gender Recognition Act, which could allow adults to change their birth certificates without a doctor’s assessment and identify their gender as ‘X’ if they wish.

However ridiculous this seems, UKIP must not be complacent about the threat this potential legislation poses to our society. As we saw with same-sex marriage, the fact that no great moral thinker, down the ages, had ever advocated the idea, did not stop it passing into law or its subsequent tyrannical cultural enforcement via the ‘Ministry of Truth’.

Indeed, I think the wise men of previous generations, would have considered the idea of equating marriage – – a union of two opposite sexes chiefly originated to produce children with chromosomes from both partners, and also and to provide the social building block of a family – – with same-sex relationships so ludicrous that they could not have conceived that any generation could ever be so silly as to propose it.

They recognised that, while there are no real differences between human beings from all over the world, there are fundamental differences between male and female human beings. Men and women are equal but not the same; their biological, physical and emotional relationships are entirely different and to pretend otherwise is either naive or devious.

The American author and commentator Dennis Prager wrote a chillingly prescient warning in 2012:

‘There is a fierce battle taking place to render meaningless the man-woman distinction; the most important distinction regarding human beings’ personal identity. Nothing would accomplish this as much as same-sex marriage. The whole premise of same-sex marriage is that gender is insignificant. It doesn’t matter whether you marry a man or a woman. Love, not gender, matters’.

He also warned of ‘the consequences for our children and grandchildren’ and gave ‘gender confusion and the loss of motherhood and fatherhood as values’ as examples.

His warning, like so many others, was ignored. And now, five years later, we have Justine Greening’s statement and the proposed Gender Recognition Act reforms…..

But, rolling back for a moment, a few thoughts to bear in mind:

In 2012, only gay activists (a minority group within a minority group) fought for same-sex marriage. It became clear from polls, radio phone-ins, newspaper essays written by gay people, and open discussions that there was no clear majority amongst the gay community pushing for the changes.

Most said their ‘equal rights’ as relating to marriage were comfortably satisfied by civil partnerships. Indeed, they generally expressed the same amazement, shared by the public as a whole, that the issue was apparently a priority for David Cameron and the coalition.

Gay people who, according to ONS figures, represent approximately 2.5% of the population are not the problem here. It is the ‘tyranny of an activist minority’ within the 2.5% that causes the damage. Unfortunately, as so often happens, the organised, concentrated minority misleads and subjugates the unprepared, diffuse majority.

The result was that twenty-four million married people had their marriages redefined without a semblance of a proper consultation, let alone consent. No party at all had it in their manifesto before the previous election.

660,000 people signed a petition opposing gay marriage. It was ignored. A much smaller number (only 100,000 approximately) entered into civil partnerships in the eight years following them becoming legal in 2005. That number is only a small single-digit percentage of the number of the gay community.

I believe approximately 15,000 gay marriages took place between March 2014 and October 2015. About half of those involved people who were already in civil partnerships.

I think the numbers speak for themselves. They show that many wrong-headed politicians have an unreliable grasp of the concept of democracy, a dwindling tolerance of free speech, and a total lack of concern for the huge societal damage they will inflict on future generations.

I also believe that ‘equality and fairness’ is not the motivation of most gay activists. They argue for tolerance, yet respond with vitriolic and spiteful intolerance to anyone who dares to disagree with them.

They appear to be seeking not just acceptance (which they already have) but the affirming stamp of official social approval. If you have the ‘right’ to other people’s approval then you automatically deprive those people of their basic human ‘right’ to their own opinions and values.

Individual same-sex couples have, of course, the right to think of their relationship as a ‘marriage’ if they wish. But they have no right to force other people to think so.

What do I want UKIP to do about it? I expect UKIP not to ignore the warnings, and to fight fiercely and consistently against a movement that has very little to do with love and equality. It has far more to do with a serious attack on personal freedom of opinions, speech and actions.

I expect UKIP to defend future generations from the consequences of today’s foolishness.

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
About Howard Keating (2 Articles)
Howard Keating has been a member and a fUKIP foot soldier since 2011

14 Comments on Warnings ignored and same-sex marriage

  1. If the law permits me to self identify as a woman (despite the facts to the contrary) then there can be no limit to the categories that I can self identify as, and the authorities must comply to my demands, even if it requires the expenditure of £millions on their IT system to account for my requirements.

    I demand the right to self identify as a giraffe! Now they must add “species” as an option to the census form, and every other official form. Failure to do so will bring out thousands of self identified giraffes, with public shaming and denunciations of giraffeophobes, and de-platforming. I am sure that Richard Dawkins would be supportive!

    Anybody who dares to tell us that we are just being silly, and to wind our neck in must be publicly humiliated. Truth must be regarded as all relative anyway. The term “truthophobia” must be expunged as meaningless. Anybody who burns a book which states “the truth shall set you free” (John 8:32) must be lauded by the UKIP spokesman. I am sure that Shneur Odze would agree.

    I sometimes think that the world has gone utterly mad.

  2. To paraphrase your comment:

    You can call a giraffe a horse. But that won’t make it a horse. It remains, simply and accurately, a giraffe.

    You can call a homosexual gay. But that won’t make it gay. It remains, simply and accurately, a homosexual.

    One could have stopped there.

  3. The vociferous LGBT lot want more then equality as evidenced by the current crop of parades and ongoing support of the BBC. Seems that in this and many other matters minorities rule the roost.

  4. Justine Greening’s vile and repugnant Gender Recognition Act defies all logic it must be defeated by the sane people left in the UK –

  5. Very encouraging to read such a clear article. Thank you, Howard! Fully agree with Commenters Michael and John. UKIP must stand strong and apart from the 3-in-1 political system (LibLabCon) with their SuperState Agenda. Support4thefamily.org is another organisation one could support.

  6. Howard, many years ago when studying Marketing Management we were taught that a sale is most likely to occur when the sales person most closely resembles, in the broadest sense, the prospective customer. We were told “If you want to sell life insurance to Zulus hire a Zulu salesman”. (Yes, this was in South Africa.) Experience has taught me that this maxim is largely correct. On this basis, since most adults are married to someone of the opposite gender and have children, I think UKIP should, through its policies and marketing literature, project an image that supports and appeals to this group in order to maximise appeal to voters and hopefully achieve political success.

    Clearly this should be approached in a positive way (sell the benefits) and designed so it doesn’t offend those who don’t or can’t fit in with the traditional family model.

    I think most people, regardless of their own orientation, would support the notion that every child deserves to have a mummy and daddy and that even those that don’t or can’t themselves fit the family model would support this as I imagine that most of them were themselves brought up this way.

    Cultural Marxists have, over the years, been doing everything in their power to undermine the family unit in every way imaginable using their ‘softly softly catchee monkey, death by a thousand cuts’ approach. We need to push back strongly on this. We need to stop their propaganda in our schools.

    We need to tell the frogs the water’s getting hot so jump out!

    In short, I think UKIP needs to be the family values party.

  7. Great article.The whitewashing of the warnings and lies are reminiscent of the pro EU arguments. Yet, I suspect that there is only a minority of people in the UK who would wish to see the end of the UK and its adsorption into a new EU superstate. As with gay marriage the politicians seem only interested in serving minorities. Cameron was virtual signalling without realising the immense harm he was doing to the fabric of decent society. UKIP needs to fight hard for common sense. There are organisations like Coalition for Marriage that are doing good work in identifying the hypocrisy and damage that recent legislation has delivered. There is a lot more lunacy afoot as every inch given is turned into a mile.

    • Cameron was virtue-signalling to please his EU masters who had proclaimed that every EU country should have legislated for same-sex marriage by a certain target date. He plunged into fast-tracking the measure to deflect attention from problems in other areas and, of course to pander to his beloved deputy-leader Nick Clegg, the EU fan-boy par excellence.

      I had my doubts about same-sex marriage at first because I thought troublemakers would demand to be married in some church that would refuse, leading to all kinds of discord and PC-activist screeching. That didn’t happen, so personally I’m OK with same-sex marriage; what’s unfair is that they still have the civil partnership option, but heterosexual couples don’t. I don’t feel that my heterosexual marriage is changed or undermined in the least by gay couples wanting to swear commitment to each other for life. The more stable relationships there are, the better for society.

      Marriage is not a biological condition, but gender is. The post-modern marxists we really have to watch out for are the ‘gender-fluidity’ brigade. These people want to dismiss gender as a thing of the imagination, or the product of a corrupt society. They are endlessly ranting about transphobia and labelling those who won’t agree with them as ‘transphobic’. In Canada, the lunatic government is legislating to force people to use invented personal pronouns such as ‘ze’, ‘zir’, zirself’ if an Arthur/Martha doesn’t want to be identified as a specific gender. Once this kind of rubbish is taught in schools, the results will be dreadful. Transgender people are a tiny, tiny minority and to legislate to criminalise any member of the vast the majority if they refuse to co-operate in loony-tunes-PC is sheer, unadulterated madness.

    • Thanks for your comment John. As you say, just like with the EU, we have some huge battles to fight.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*