I have followed the Asher’s bakery case with interest. I believe that the entire case was contrived and maliciously set up by those seeking to promote an aggressive gay agenda that seeks not equality, but instead to have gay rights trump the right to freedom of conscience.
Those who campaign for gay rights are entitled to equality, but so to are those who strongly oppose gay marriage on the basis of deeply held religious convictions.
If one claims to be a Protestant then this entails following Biblical principles. Indeed the Ulster Volunteer Force who formed to resist Home Rule held to the words “For God And Ulster”.
The argument being put forward that introducing a conscience clause (using powers granted to Northern Ireland under devolution) is anti British, when followed through to it’s logical conclusion is simply ludicrous.
As Paul Givan pointed out on the Nolan TV show last week, the Ulster Volunteer Force formed to resist Home Rule that was to be imposed by a British parliament.
If we follow the notion that we should slavishly follow our mother parliament through to it’s logical conclusion then it would lead us to the point of saying that the Ulster Volunteer Force should never have been formed and instead the people of Ulster should have just bowed the knee to the mother parliament.
I oppose gay marriage and in my personal opinion I feel it goes against the very principles of Protestantism, and given my view that loyalism springs from Protestantism then I can only conclude that supporting gay marriage and seeking to trample over the religious beliefs of persons who wish to follow the Bible would be a gross betrayal of Ulster Loyalism.
Of course loyalism is a mixed bag and there are many who would seek to separate loyalism from Protestantism. That is all part and parcel of a broad based movement. The problem comes when you try and reconcile the founding principles of the covenant and the Ulster Volunteer Force-who formed to resist Home Rule under the banner carrying the words ‘For God and Ulster’- with a new set of principles that oppose religious beliefs. This simply does not work. It is illogical.
I support the conscience clause. There needs to be protection for those with religious beliefs. You cannot force someone to support a cause that they wholeheartedly oppose. This is the agenda of the left wing. It is verging on communism. This left wing agenda seeks to destroy centuries of noble values all under the auspices of ‘equality’.
I am no fan of the DUP, but on this occasion they are absolutely correct to try and protect those with religious convictions who are being increasingly persecuted by a politically correct agenda of appeasement.
The Courts in the United Kingdom and the European court of human rights have continually held in favour of the protection of religious beliefs.
Marriage is a Biblical tradition, gay marriage is seeking to rob part of a religion they claim to oppose and make it their own. That is in itself illogical.
If those who campaign for gay marriage oppose the Bible then why on earth would they want to follow the Biblical tradition of marriage which is between one man and one woman?
If those who oppose the conscience clause are genuine in their opposition then they should explain clearly how this reconciles with our Protestant culture and heritage and indeed how it reconciles with the founding principles of the Ulster Volunteer Force who fought and died in the name of God and Ulster.