Box Turtle Bulletin
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobby“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobbyMarch 28th, 2014
Tonight England and Wales (soon to be followed by Scotland) will begin to allow same-sex couples to marry. And, for the most part, everyone is happy. Though the BBC, for reasons inscuteable, has decided to focus on the negative. (BBC)
About one in five British adults would turn down an invitation to a same-sex wedding, research suggests.
As legislation in England and Wales allowing gay couples to marry comes into force on Saturday, the BBC Radio 5 live survey also found men were nearly twice as likely to stay away as women.
The poll of 1,007 people found 68% agreed gay marriage should be permitted, with 26% opposing it.
Which, of course, has a local Catholic priest all giddy.
Father Edmund Montgomery, a member of the organisation and a Catholic priest in Greater Manchester, said: “As the Church, we love those seeking a same-sex union, but our love for them requires we tell them the true meaning of marriage, something which that fifth of respondents find difficult but have the integrity to do by turning down the invitation.
“In our modern culture it is increasingly difficult to have an open debate without being labelled as bigoted or intolerant.”
He continued: “It is a great irony that those seeking to increase tolerance do not extend that to those who disagree with them.”
Fr Montgomery, who at 29 is the youngest priest in the diocese of Shrewsbury, said he thought more people might turn down an invitation to a gay wedding were they not concerned they might be regarded as extreme.
Oh silly priest. Oh silly BBC.
Do you know nothing at all about human nature? No one is doing that.
Now there will be some percentage which will never be invited to a same-sex wedding. Such as Father Montgomery, for example. So they will never have the opportunity to “tell them the true meaning of marriage”.
But very few people who receive an invitation to a wedding are going to be so colossally rude as to deliberately insult the person inviting them. It is one thing to tell pollsters that you would decline a theoretical gay wedding invitation. It’s quite something else to tell your nephew or your coworker that you aren’t going to their wedding because it isn’t “true”.
So today we’ll skip right over the sour grapes that Father Montgomery and the BBC are serving up and head straight for the champagne. Cheers!
Latest Posts
Featured Reports
In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.
When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.
In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.
On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.
Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"
At last, the truth can now be told.
Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!
And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.
Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.
Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.
Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.
The FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.
“Google” is a trademark of Google Inc.
© Box Turtle Bulletin. All Rights Reserved.
Posts 
Posts via daily email:
Ben in Oakland
March 28th, 2014
What a crappy little twit. and at’s just the BBC.
John
March 28th, 2014
Ah, they are so math-challenged. They celebrate a poll that finds 68% of the respondents in favor of same-sex marriage and 26% opposed! No wonder no one takes the loons seriously.
esurience
March 28th, 2014
He continued: “It is a great irony that those seeking to increase tolerance do not extend that to those who disagree with them.â€
Part of tolerance is opposition to intolerance. It has to stand in opposition to something or it wouldn’t mean anything.
There’s no conflict between being tolerant and labeling bigoted people as “intolerant.” Indeed tolerance requires that.
The article does show there’s a lot of work to still be done though. Despite only 26% of people opposing marriage equality:
A majority of 59% of people asked agreed a person should not be considered homophobic for opposing the legislation permitting gay marriage.
Anti-gay sentiment is still viewed in some way as legitimate, as within the bounds of decency, even by otherwise pro-gay people, in a way that other prejudicial sentiments would not be.
I think it’s important that that changes.
Bose in St. Peter MN
March 28th, 2014
Homework for Father Montgomery: Start talking to fellow Catholics who are part of the 68%. Report back on how many have engaged publicly by calling you bigoted or intolerant. Sort out your own house before pretending you have wisdom for the world outside it.
Next assignment: At the weddings you officiate this summer, take polls of the attendees. Find out how many of them support only “true” marriage as defined by the church (virgins on wedding day, contraception-free, no rights to divorce or remarriage). Of those who don’t only support “true” marriage, then ask whether they support and celebrate the (no doubt) virgins at the altar that day, hoping they can live out their Catholic destiny exactly as they see fit.
To no one’s surprise, he would find that gay people, remarried people, those who champion reproductive health and rights and countless others don’t just tolerate the church’s views, they celebrate people’s rights to the dignity of choosing their own lives.
Richard Rush
March 28th, 2014
The priest: “It is a great irony that those seeking to increase tolerance do not extend that to those who disagree with them”
We need to remember where they are coming from. They not only tolerate, but celebrate and praise the barbarity of their perfect God as documented in the Bible. So, even if they felt that one of God’s barbaric acts was just a tad over-the-top, they would thoroughly tolerate it.
TampaZeke
March 28th, 2014
The BBC has been quite antagonistic toward marriage equality throughout the process.
jerry
March 28th, 2014
If I were to tell a friend I couldn’t attend his wedding because I consider marriages to be civil ceremonies that aren’t valid when performed in a religious institution.
I suspect Edmund Montgomery would be yelling very loudly that I am a bigot.
So I have no problem telling preacher Monkeynuts he is a bigot.
Steve
March 28th, 2014
This isn’t something you can “agree to disagree about”. Denying people fundamental rights isn’t a matter of “disagreement” you stupid child fucker.
TXRuss
March 28th, 2014
Well said, Timothy.
Jim Taylor
March 28th, 2014
Sadly, though, I think you’ll find there are some close family members (my parents for one) who would choose to avoid and ignore the marriage out of Catholic belief and “love.” It’s sad and needlessly hurtful, and they truly don’t get it. They treat my husband perfectly well, even better than me & my brothers at times, and love our son to death, and think we’re wonderful parents and great people — but we’re somehow doing something evil. The cognitive dissonance makes my head explode at times, but I love them and they me. You just have to roll with it I suppose…
Pacal
March 28th, 2014
“It is a great irony that those seeking to increase tolerance do not extend that to those who disagree with them.”
Translated, “We view any expression of disapproval / criticism of our views as intolerant and that it should not be allowed. Further we are totally intolerant of anyone labeling our bigoted views as bigoted.”
Richard Rush
March 28th, 2014
Pacal, you nailed it. The attitude ties in with the apparent fact that there are plenty of Christian zealots who long for the good old days when blasphemy laws coupled with stern punishment would have solved the problem of intolerance of intolerance.
http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2014/03/video-matt-barbers-website-backs-blasphemy-laws-against-billmaher.html
Hue-Man
March 31st, 2014
The BBC failed to point out that these results are typical of Western nations generally. Here’s a 2012 poll in Canada, 7 years after the national definition of marriage was amended and a decade after the first same-sex marriages (following provincial court decisions).
“Ipsos Reid found that 62 per cent of people believe same-sex marriage “should be fully recognized and equal to conventional heterosexual marriage.”
Another 20 per cent said “it should be allowed to exist in civil law but not have the same legal weight as a conventional marriage.” Just 18 per cent said “it is wrong and it should never be lawful.”” http://www.canada.com/news/Canadians+show+wide+support+abortion+rights+marriage/6878536/story.html
Nathaniel
March 31st, 2014
Hue-Man, I wonder what aspects of legal weight they would happily deny civil marriages of same-sex couples that opposite-sex couples should totally get. I can almost buy the everything-but-name stance of some people, but marriage-only-in-name makes no sense.
Leave A Comment