“ Madam, thou doest protest too much!” spoken by Queen Gertrude in William Shakespeare's "Hamlet"

 I have watched, thought and listened to the campaign to swing cultural attitudes away from the traditional meaning of “marriage” to a more so called “liberal” attitude towards homosexual unions. The first casualty in the public relations exercise was the meaning of the word “gay” which was put in harness to work for the homosexual lobby, and then the big issue was the recognition of equal rights, particularly legal equality so the term “civil union” came into being. Then there was the concerted effort to shack up with everybody’s favorite word- “love”. I mean if it is love- it has to be good and wholesome doesn’t it? It seems that fuddy-duddy word “lust” doesn’t enter the picture anymore.

Before you switch channels just give me a little more of your time. The real issue at stake here, and what few seem to be talking about is this: Are the laws at large in our society merely the result of human constructs, are they just mere creaturely conventions or are there laws that go deeper and transcend the authority of government?

Is marriage just society’s way of rubber stamping a heterosexual relationship or does it reflect a concurrent law that is working deep within our humanity? If you’re unsure of what I’m getting at look at another example: When children are abused by those to whom they are entrusted we have laws that govern and protect the most vulnerable of our society. And rightly so of course.

But why “of course”?

When twin infants die at the hands of a family member and no one is brought to justice we are outraged (and who wouldn’t be?) is this merely the reflection of our love for good government or is it a natural hatred of injustice? Is this sense of justice something that resonates within our souls? I put it to you that good laws are good not because they are fashionable or fashioned out of pragmatism by clever people, but because they are consistent with a universal law written within us that they harmonize with.

We knew when those twins died that someone should be held to account, but the experts at law said that one that has been acquitted of murder, even a double murder (after only one minute of deliberation by the jury) does not have to stand trial again, even after the coroners report said a few years later: ‘that the twins had suffered the brain injuries which led to their deaths … at a time "whilst they were in the sole custody, care and control of their father"’

We knew that when impeached President Clinton claimed he had not had sex with Lewinsky (she had sex with him) natural justice had been thwarted by semantics.

We know that when the experts at law convicted the experts at seismology for not correctly prophesying the recent Italian earthquake that natural justice had been suspended.

We know that while the world reels and staggers with unbelief as those who have perpetuated financial misery upon countless millions facing an austere future are given obscene bonuses as they quit their polluted office- justice has not been served.

I have heard (because I don’t know many) that homosexuals are some of the nicest people that one could hope to meet, they exhibit effusive good manners, friendliness, civic responsibility and indeed one might see them as model citizens. And I have no reason to question that, it makes sense to me.  

If this campaign to change the definition of marriage succeeds, will it be the hollow triumph of a vocal minority manipulating public opinion? Will it achieve what they really want? But what do they really want? They already have equal rights under the law in matters of property and so forth, they even have a term nicely invented for them (civil union) but no, they want it all, they want to force on the rest of us the idea that the word “marriage” applies to them, but why?

Could it be that inside them as well as in all of us that when we do wrong there is a sense of justice- of right and wrong that will not give us peace, even when the laws of the land justify us, even when society in unison applauds and affirms our way of life? Is it that even when we have at a certain level convinced ourselves we are right- we are harangued by a sense of justice that will not be appeased, that will not stay silent, but will quietly but insistently whisper to us above all the deafening throng; the quiet, incontrovertible voice that says that what we do is not OK?

“Two things fill the mind with ever-increasing wonder and awe, the more often and the more intensely the mind of thought is drawn to them: the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me.” Immanuel Kant

If they succeed will they be at peace? I think not, but thankfully there is one to go to for peace, indeed he is called the prince of Peace.

Perhaps they do protest too much!

Now here is a video clip giving strictly biological reasons why governments should continue to promote marriage as unique between a man and a woman.

The following video is more recent development of this cultural engineering by a minority that further seeks to erode and marginalize- and finally criminalize Christians.