web analytics

Eve; not Steve

By Mike Cunningham On May 11th, 2012

 

The heading to this post is taken from a man/community/nation with whom I have a great deal of affection, namely Middle America. He was being interviewed, ‘vox pop’ style for t.v. news, about the statement made by his President on the subject of ‘gay’ marriage, or to place it in its rightful context, Homosexual Marriage. He stood firm when asked the question, baseball cap pushed back on his head, grizzled and slightly greying, and replied “God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!” I personally have never heard that statement before, although one presumes it was not coined that morning. His stance reminded me, an elderly Englishman, of only one other time when America, and all who lived there, were so comprehensively misunderstood. That time was when the Japanese military began preparations for war, and they didn’t even consider America to be even a threat on their horizon. Once the Pacific Fleet was destroyed, the mongrel nation America would see sense, fold their cards and leave the game; so ran the thoughts of the politicians/military ‘geniuses’ who planned Pearl Harbour. The massive fleets which darkened the seas, which absorbed the ‘kamikazes’ without flinching; the sheer, overwhelming military might of the greatest industrial nation the world had ever seen gave those ‘geniuses’ their answer.

Just two steps behind Prime Minister Cameron stands the awful Lynne Featherstone, Minister for so-called Equalities. One presumes that she is tearing handfuls of blankets apart after the silent revolt against homosexual marriage, orchestrated by senior Tories, Churchmen and ordinary Tories who were just plain ‘fed up’ with the ‘on message’ stance of their leader; and hit Cameron and his Coalition with a broadside which rocked Downing Street because they were so completely unprepared for it. Here was trendy Dave, trying to tell the electorate that he sympathised with a tiny handful of weirdies who couldn’t understand why they still felt ‘apart’ from life, and who also demanded the ‘right’ to marry; as if the repeal of that last legal barrier would provide ‘completion’ or ‘fulfilment’, or whatever buzz-word turns the bent crowd on these days, and his Party turned around and stated, ‘Enough’!

True, the ‘Gay marriage’ bit is being quietly shelved, and the Lib-Dems are being told to ‘shut it’, but have you ever considered what will happen when the sheep, who have never ever lifted their eyes higher than ‘Eastenders’ or ‘Coronation Street’; whose lives are complete now they are watching ‘Britain’s got Talent’ or some equally soulless show on another t.v. channel, whose children comprise the feral and the fearless; ever consider what happens when they will vote massively for Labour because they dislike the reality which is the core behind the Coalition? You will see Harriet Harman, even worse in my mind’s eye than Featherstone could ever be, standing at the Despatch Box pushing that same ‘Homosexual Marriage’ agenda through with a majority which doesn’t need Lynne to bolster it.

Just in case anyone has missed it, after reading the latest post on Cranmer, I have updated my cross-post upon my own site, as well as the advert in question.

11 Responses to “Eve; not Steve”

  1. If God didn’t make Steve, who did ?

  2. // His stance reminded me, an elderly Englishman, of only one other time when America, and all who lived there, were so comprehensively misunderstood. //

    What makes you think that mainstream opinion in the US is against same-sex marriage?

  3. If God didn’t make Steve, who did ?

    Why Adam and Eve of course!
    Turkey basters and test tubes hadn’t been invented yet.

    Incidentally Colm,
    I went to a meeting last night – I think it was called a Diocesan Synod – (I’m still learning the lingo)
    and the main topic under discussion was…………..
    Same Sex Marriage.
    (I am beginning to think we have joined a Church obsessed with sex. :) )
    Anyway the bloke made some very interesting points, and there was some lively discussion afterwards.
    I think you would have enjoyed it.

  4. Agit8ed

    I’d enjoy any organisation obsessed with sex ;)

  5. God made Charles Manson, too, along with Cardinal Law, and the suntan lady from NJ.

    The fact that God made a person does not mean that the person’s conduct is wonderful.

  6. agreed Phantom – God also made those selfish heterosexuals like the ones in North Carolina who go out of their way to vote to prevent homosexuals having the same legal recognition for their relationships that they themselves enjoy.

  7. You should visit NC some day.

    It’s a pleasant state, bigger than you think, good people, good country music if you’re into that.

  8. Phantom

    I’m sure it’s all that and more – That doesn’t stop it’s electorate also being flawed and wrong in their political decision making. My understanding is that ‘Amendment one’ doesn’t just refer to the definition of marriage, it is a proposition that forbids the State from acknowledging any form of legal recognition for same sex couples. That isn’t an expression of just traditional defence of marraige, it’s selfish and genuine bigotry against gay couples just for not being heterosexual.

  9. Colm

    If true, that is something worth campaigning to change.

  10. Colm

    I agree that they should not have touched civil partnerships.

    They went too far.

    That part of the bill was partially justified by its authors as a means of making it bulletproof against creative judges, who would take advantage of the slightest ambiguity in the language to create entirely new fields of ” rights ” like the judges in California and the other fun states.

  11. I too am not actually fussed on the definition of marraige. Let it remain the union of man/woman as far as I am concerened, as long as same sex couples can have their partnership recognised for reasons of next of kin and financial/ property security.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.