And the rights of ordinary people?

It is reported that Stonewall, the homosexual rights activists, have presented a draft Bill in which the terms 'husband' and 'wife' would be substituted with the words 'parties to marriage'. This proposal is prompted by a proposed change in the law to allow civil marriage for homosexual couples. The Daily Telegraph reports (not apparently available on-line) that Lynne Featherstone, the Liberal Democrat Equalities Minister, has stated that a consultation on the proposed change in the law would commence next month. It also reports that all three leaders of the Lib/Lab/Con have publicly expressed their support for such a change.


Admittedly at the moment the suggestion that the words 'husband' and 'wife' should be replaced by the words 'parties to marriage' is but that, namely a suggestion, however it raises some rather basic questions where rights are concerned. Yes, everyone has rights but why should the rights of those who wish to use the words 'husband' and 'wife' be removed on the wishes of a minority pressure group? By what right do the leaders of the Lib/Lab/Con presume to dictatorially change the words used in marriage ceremonies? As with all 'consultations' this one will no doubt be held with 'stakeholders' and once again it will be those actually involved in a process who will not be consulted.


Politicians seem unable to cease their practice of social engineering - witness their attempt to decide what size home people should have. This latest idea, if it became law, would be yet another individual liberty lost, one to add to what is now becoming a long list. We are indeed being de-humanised to the point where the right of choice over our life and how we live it is being taken away - by force if necessary. When one considers this political process one has to ask just what will be the trigger which will result in the people forcibly removing those they have come to despise? Or, perish the thought, have the sheep been safely corralled?