Article Published: 3rd March 2010
Christian Concern for our Nation

Last night (2nd March 2010) the House of Lords voted to change the law on Civil Partnerships, allowing them to be performed in Churches and/or with religious language.

The amendment, which was introduced by Lord Alli, an openly homosexual Peer, and backed by a number of liberal Bishops, effectively removes one of the final distinctions between Marriage and Civil Partnerships"”introduced just five years ago as being purely secular in nature.

The amendment was voted through at 11pm, by 95 votes to 21"”an extraordinarily low number for such an important matter"”and was hailed as a breakthrough by homosexual activists.

In January 2010, the Government had resisted Lord Alli’s amendment, reassuring the public that it was "˜not a workable solution to this issue’. ‚   However, in an unexpected move, the government suddenly allowed its Peers a free vote on the issue. ‚   The Conservative Party and Liberal Democrats also gave its Peers a free vote.

Ironically, the amendment was advanced as an issue of religious freedom, with some religious organisations voicing their desire to hold Civil Partnership ceremonies.

However, homosexual activists have previously made it clear that any change in the law would only be a step towards forcing churches to perform civil partnerships. For example, Ben Summerskill, Head of Stonewall, recently said: "Right now, faiths shouldn’t be forced to hold civil partnerships, although in ten or 20 years, that may change."

Andrea Williams, Director of CCFON, said:

"What took place last night is nothing short of outrageous and all who care about democracy should be alarmed at the proceedings. ‚   At the end of January, Baroness Royall for the Government stated that: "˜Any change can therefore be brought only after proper and careful consideration of these issues.’

Click here to read the rest of the story.

---

FAIR USE NOTICE: This article contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of religious, environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.