← Prev article
Next article →
Peter Tatchell Agrees with Matthew Hosier image

Peter Tatchell Agrees with Matthew Hosier

0
0
0

By Andrew Wilson | Monday 26 August 2013

I never thought I’d see this, but a rapprochement between radical gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell and Christian sexual ethicist Matt Hosier seems to be taking place. In a series of posts here, Matt has made it clear that referring to “same-sex marriage” as if it is about “marriage equality” is ridiculous, given the crucial areas in which, even according to the legislative language, there are enormous differences between the four-thousand-year-old version and the four-month-old version. What surprised me was that Peter Tatchell, writing in the New Statesman, would agree so emphatically. He lists six ways in which “same-sex marriage” is not equal to traditional marriage:

1. Pension rights are different.
2. Opposite sex civil partnerships are still off-limits.
3. Non-consummation and adultery are not grounds for annulment in “same-sex marriage”.
4. The marriages of transgendered people who had marriages annulled to change sex have not been restored.
5. The Church of England’s quadruple lock applies.
6. Other faith groups can be more restrictive on “same-sex marriages”, too.

So there you have it: SSM and traditional marriage, despite the government’s best efforts to make them so, are still not equal. It reminds me of that brilliant scene with Allison Janney and Felicity Huffman in The West Wing:

CJ:    The President’s not going to want to end a bipartisan breakfast with the Republicans speaking from one place and the Democrats…
ANN:  And the Majority Leader’s not going to stand at a cardboard podium in your front yard while you stand in the White House Press briefing room and with good reason.
CJ:    Which is?
ANN:  I don’t think they’re on equal footing.
CJ:    My boss and your boss?
ANN:   Yes.
CJ:    I don’t think they are either.

← Prev article
Next article →

More like this...