Dear Lord Carey reach for your dictionary

So at the Coalition for Marriage rally on the fringe of the Conservative Party conference the former Archbishop of Canterbury resorted to inferring many involved in the campaign for equal marriage Nazis including the Deputy Prime Minister. He seems to have lost the plot as well as the dictionary when he said in response to the press release that was retracted by Nick Clegg over the word bigot he said:

"Let’s have a sensible debate about this, not call people names. Let us remember the Jews in Nazi Germany. What started against them was when they started to be called names.

"And that was the first stage towards that totalitarian state. We have to resist them. We treasure democracy. We treasure our Christian inheritance and we want to debate this in a fair way."

Apart from the fact that Lord Carey, like so many others, forgets that the Holocaust included not just the Jews but the gays, there is also the mistaking of what totalitarianism is especially in light of how equal marriage is being discussed and introduced here across the UK.

Now a dictionary definition:

to·tal·i·tar·i·an  (t-tl-târ-n) 

adj. Of, relating to, being, or imposing a form of government in which the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life, the individual is subordinated to the state, and opposing political and cultural expression is suppressed from the Free Dictionary

So let me get this straight. Those wanting legislation that allows everyone the right to marry in a civil manner and allows the religious groups that want to do so to also carry out same sex marriage is totalitarian. Isn't treasuring that Christian inheritance to the extent of imposing your will as the only way just that. They have used words such as unnatural, not traditional against same sex marriages. And indeed in the recent debate in Stormont politicians said the idea was 'greedy', in it for 'temporary gain', a threat to 'civil and religious liberties', 'pointless', a 'worthless course', a 'slippery slope'.

The sensible debate about this is that there are some religious groups in this nation that are prepared to carry out same-sex marriages. What has been proposed for England & Wales, in Scotland and was debated here in Northern Ireland was the lifting of the States prohibition on marriage being between a man and a woman only. There was no lifting of the number of people nor the inclusion of a creature of another species in the TWO that would be married. Also in none of the three places this is being discussed is there any requirement on religious groups to carry it out, that is left to the governance of those religious groups separately.

So far from being totalitarian the equal marriage proposals are not centralising all control on this issue.

• Each religious groups governing body is free to make up its own mind. 
•  Religious freedom is not being suppressed either by the state or by any other branch of religion. 
• Individuals are not being coerced into whom they can marry although the opposite is true as Michelle McIlveen stated during her speech in Stormont:

"Moreover, everyone is free to choose to marry.  There is no bar or prohibition on marriage. People are free to marry provided they marry someone who is of the opposite sex."

• Gay people of faith have the right to invite their deity into a marriage which they cannot do in a civil partnership again no suppression of civil or cultural expression

So just who is totalitarian?

• The Church is seeking control on civil society
• It wants outright control on marriage something it hasn't had since civil marriage was allowed outside of the Anglican Church
• The individual is subordinate to the Churches teachings even those that do not follow those teachings or who view them in a different light
• Opposing political views, even if they allow the churches views freedom, are to be blocked at all costs

Blogged elsewhere: Widdecombe wants referendum on equal marriage just not neutral questions

Ann Widdecombe has called for a referendum on the subject on gay marriage. She believes in doing this because the Coalition for Marriage carried out an opinion poll which showed that 51% of people thought it was unnecessary. This flies in contrast to previous opinion polls.

The reason? I suspect it has to do with the loaded nature of the question asking whether they agree or disagree with this statement:

Since gay and lesbian couples already have the same rights as married couples available to them under civil partnership, they should not be allowed to redefine marriage for everyone else.

So lets look at just what was asked in the other independent opinion polls on the issue.

Read the resf over on LBGT+ Lib Dems Northern Ireland

Jeffrey get your facts right about cafés, the bible and LGBT in this country

Today in PMQs the DUP's MP for Lagan Valley, Jeffrey Donaldson, asked David Cameron the following question:

Q8. [76635] Mr Jeffrey M. Donaldson (Lagan Valley) (DUP): The Prime Minister has warned African countries that unless they improve gay rights, he will cut their aid, yet in many African countries where we pour in millions of pounds of aid, Christians face great persecution and destruction of churches, lives and property. Here in the UK, anyone who displays a Bible verse on the wall of a café faces prosecution. Was Ann Widdecombe right when she said that in the 21st century hedgehogs have more rights than Christians?

Now me being curious wanted to take a look at just how many cafe owners had faced prosecution for the offence of displaying a bible verse as I know a few of them around Northern Ireland that do so. Though I do know that potentially there are a few that are on permanent display on roadsides in Northern Ireland that could cause offence to certain sections of the community under section 75 (1) of the Belfast Agreement and I have yet to hear of anyone or any LGBT group protesting or prosecuting their existence.

It appears I wasn't the only one to want to do a fact check, read this piece by full fact check.

The Ann Widdecombe reference comes from this article in her Express column. But she doesn't mention anything about Cafes.

No that honour goes to the Fail on Sunday (again I have to apologise to readers for the link). After 24 paragraphs of reporting in which it is said that

• the cafe owner was threatened with arrest
• that he was told to stop playing his DVDs of the New Testament
• that he faced and intensive inquisition for over an hour after the police arrived unannounced
• that he was being bullied by the police
• that he feared being put into handcuffs
• that the Christian Institute (yes them again) are preparing a complaint on the cafe owners behalf

We get to this statement from Lancashire Constabulary after it says that they turned up to look into a complaint from a member of the public under the Public Order Act 1986 (which also for the record states that criticism of sexual conduct shall not in itself be deemed threatening or to stir up hatred):

"At no point did the officer ask the cafe owner to remove any materials or arrest the man and we took a commonsense and objective approach in dealing with the complaint. We believe our response and the action we took was completely proportionate and our officers are always available should the cafe owner want to discuss the matter or need any advice in the future. 

"The Constabulary is respectful of all religious views. However, we do have a responsibility to make sure that material that communities may find deeply offensive or inflammatory is not being displayed in public. 

"No complaint has been received about the conduct of the officer in question and we are satisfied that they performed their duties professionally."

Yeah it is another non-story in the Fail.

Maybe Jeffrey should look at some of the activity within his own party. Of course there is the former chair of the Health Committee who said that homosexual should see her little Christian psychiatrist friend for a cure. Or the current deputy chair who says that all those who take part in Pride are repugnant. Even those it would seem who offer counselling to suicidal LGBT young and not so young people, those who offer sexual health advise to all whether LGBT or straight, those who are men/women of the cloth, those who sit with them in Stormont or council chambers across Northern Ireland.

In America the so called family group, the American Family Association (AFA), have this week attacked the Trevor Project, a helpline for suicidal prevention among LGBT teens. So clearly they don't want people to tell these LGBT teens, who are five times more likely to take their own lives that straight teens, not to commit suicide. Sadly that is not so far removed from the actions and words of many in the DUP and indeed the tone with which Mr Donaldson asked his question. The figures for homophobic bullying of teens in Northern Ireland are as bad as in the USA where the AFA operate are just as bad.

Those of us who have been through those feelings in the past want to tell Northern Ireland LGBT teens, young people and not so young that it gets better, but how can we when our leaders fail to get their facts right about issues of homophobia real or alleged.