OK, kiddo! Here are all the fantastically amazing posts tagged with United Kingdom
The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), an anti-choice and anti-gay lobby group based in the UK, has distributed fliers suggesting that legal same-sex marriage will lead to an increased number of abortions.
“Legalised same-sex marriage will increase confusion about what it means to be a man or woman and removes natural conception from the idea of marriage,” the pamphlet states. “We must protect real marriage because it protects children in the womb.”
Now, I know it sounds like there are some logical connections missing in this assertion. You may think that, due to the dedication and procedures necessary for a gay or lesbian couple to have a child, abortions would be highly unlikely in the LGBT community. SPUC, however, was clearly limited for space and had to omit some details. So, on behalf of SPUC, here’s how I think that they think this works:
All men are secretly gay and always have been, which is why governments enact laws to keep them from marrying each other. Once such legal barriers disappear, however, men will no longer be interested in any sort of physical reproduction with women, threatening the human race with extinction. Desperate for babies to continue our survival, humanity will have no choice but to construct a system of automated weaponry to launch razor-thin projectiles tipped with pre-fertilized eggs directly into the tummies of women (all of whom are still heterosexual since everyone knows that lesbianism is just a myth). The impregnated women—now alone and having left the kitchen to pursue careers—will be ill-equipped to raise their egg-gun children on their own, forcing them to choose between a quick abortion and a life of poverty. Piles of aborted fetuses will litter the cities, one beside each coin-operated abort-o-matic booth.
Did I get that right, SPUC?
Ice cream maker Ben and Jerry’s has renamed a flavour of their signature frozen treat from Oh! My! Apple Pie! to Apple-y Ever After as a way of showing their support for same-sex marriage in the UK. Opponents of equality are now reportedly lobbying for their own flavour introduction: Living in Sinnamon.
The United Kingdom has removed its lifetime ban on blood donations from gay men, replacing it with a one year deferral since the last time a donor has had sex with someone of the same gender.
So, yeah—essentially, nothing has changed.
Well, I suppose at the very least it’s an acknowledgement that the lifetime ban (which Canada still has, incidentally) was never scientifically sound. Nonetheless, I wish that questionnaires would stop singling out gay men and simply ask about risky sexual practices for everyone. This can include the number of sexual partners, whether or not the donor has unprotected sex, is non-monogamous, etc.
In western nations, gay men undeniably have a higher incidence of STDs, but heterosexuals are far from immune; in fact, the fastest growing HIV demographic in Canada is young heterosexual women, accounting for a quarter of all new infections. I have no reason to doubt the situation is similar in the UK, yet monogamous gay couples are deferred for a year every time they have sex, even if both partners have been tested—simply because they’re gay. Silly.
- One-year blood donation deferral for UK gay men [Pink News UK]
Pope Benedict XVI issued a strong condemnation against Britain on Monday for enacting legislation protecting gays from workplace and housing discrimination.
After a confirmation that he would be visiting Britain later this year (the first such visit in 28 years), Benedict XVI seemed to imply that he wasn’t terrifically happy about it, announcing that the country’s equality laws had imposed “unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs.”
Religions, incidentally, are exempt from Britain’s anti-discrimination legislation, granting Churches the ability to fire gay employees, or pass them over for promotion with impunity.
But this is an argument I hear time and time again—the idea that gay people are actually the intolerant ones, and equality legislation is all basically an attempt to limit religious freedom.
I’m not sure why it can’t go without saying, but that argument is dumb. Really, super dumb. The premise is essentially that tolerance means tolerating intolerance. We gay people, they imply, should submit ourselves to being treated as inferior, turn an accepting cheek to lobbying efforts to have us fired from our jobs, evicted from our homes, denied the equal right to civil marriage, and worse. Otherwise, it follows, we gays are restricting religious freedoms.
If there were gay lobby groups seeking constitutional amendments to ban religious marriage, attempting to gain the right to fire and evict religious people from their jobs, or seeking to deny religious people civil services, well, then these kooks can speak of intolerant gays trying to limit religious freedoms, but until then—they can apply their own standards of freedom and see who’s intolerant of whom.
- Pope’s swipe at UK equality laws provokes foes [Washington Post]
- Anger as pope condemns Britain’s gay-friendly laws [Tolerance.ca]
Britain will not recognize Canadian same-sex marriages, a U.K. judge has decided.
Mark Potter (possibly Harry’s considerably less favoured half-brother) ruled last week that recognizing same-sex marriage would “fly in the face” of human rights and “fail to recognize physical reality.” While this statement may seem entirely contradictory, the judge may have mistakenly thought it was “opposite day,” something I’m sure exists in the wizarding world.
Regardless of how the error was made, Sue Wilkinson and Celia Kitzinger are officially considered in a “domestic partnership” instead of the genuine marriage that Canada granted them in 2003. Wilkinson and Kitzinger were, of course, disappointed:
We are deeply disappointed by the judgment, not just for ourselves but for other gay couples and families. It perpetuates discrimination and it sends out the message that lesbian and gay marriages are inferior.
Though we’re disappointed, we are sure there will be a day—within our lifetimes—when there will be equality for same-sex marriage. This judgment will not stand the test of time.
Well said. And, hey, all you gotta do is wait for this magical fantasy world craze to run it’s course. That’s only one more book away, no?
- U.K. court rejects B.C. gay marriage [Toronto Star]