Since one’s attitude to homosexual acts is now considered the main way of judging whether a person is civilised, one must salute those in public life who defy this. To oppose gay ‘equality’ today is roughly as brave as it was to be publicly homosexual in, say, 1970: your position is not absolutely illegal, but it is perilous. Given how wobbly many Anglicans are on the issue, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London should be commended for their courage in the House of Lords debate. The Chief Rabbi, Lords Sacks, should be reproved. Orthodox Judaism is absolutely clear on this issue, but Lord Sacks absented himself. Perhaps he feels that Jews should not intervene in secular society. But if such a key social institution as marriage is beyond his responsibility, why did he agree to become a legislator?
The most laughable argument for the same-sex cause was that advanced by Lord Browne of Madingley, the former chief executive of BP. ‘Gay marriage,’ he told his fellow peers, ‘is a matter of strategic importance for British business.’ Really? Would we sell more to Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Russia or China if our top male executives turned up with their husbands for business dinners?
Give something clever this Christmas – a year’s subscription to The Spectator for just £75. And we’ll give you a free bottle of champagne. Click here.