Proponents of redefining marriage argue that legalising same-sex unions will merely affect the wording of the present marriage law. But what they fail to realise – or maybe what they realise but aren’t inclined to admit – is that the flow-on effects of redefining marriage are vast in scope and swift in transfusion.
Countries where marriage has been redefined all display the same damning evidence. The United Kingdom, one of the first nations to legalise same-sex marriage, is often the poster-child.
Earlier this month, during a speech at the PinkNews Awards, UK Prime Minister Theresa May unveiled a long list of plans to overhaul education, politics, and medicine in order to cater to the LGBT community.
Speaking at the Awards, the Prime Minister said: “We need to keep up our action, so we are pressing ahead with inclusive relationship and sex education in English schools, making sure that LGBT issues are taught well. We’re determined to eradicate homophobic and transphobic bullying.”
She also vowed to “streamline” the Gender Recognition Act, to make it easier for transgender people to transition.
She said: “We’ve set out plans to reform the Gender Recognition Act, streamlining and demedicalising the process for changing gender, because being trans is not an illness and it shouldn’t be treated as such.
Not long after her speech, Mrs May wrote a column for PinkNews, expounding on her support of same-sex marriage. Throughout her post, she made a pointed effort to say that her new plans were for the good of everyone:
“I want all British citizens to enjoy the fullest freedoms and protections. That includes equal marriage – because marriage should be for everyone, regardless of their sexuality.”
But how can these new mandates give British citizens their ‘fullest freedoms’? According to the Prime Minister, the United Kingdom is intent on creating legislation to induce gender ideology into the educational system and the medical community. Regardless of where one stands on same-sex marriage, it is obvious that these statutes will ultimately terminate fundamental rights, such as free speech or freedom of religion in Britain.
Furthermore, how will such mandates create ‘equality’? As highlighted in her speech in the video below, the LGBT community is already supported by a dearth of government-funded projects. Not only will these new mandates go above and beyond ‘equality’, but they overstep the silent majority, pointedly granting the LGBT minority additional rights to which the rest of the population will not be privy.
Redefining marriage will not just happen in a vacuum. As exemplified by the United Kingdom, it will directly conflict with the fundamental rights of the majority.
Why would one say ‘Yes’ to that?