Meaning of marriage can’t change

editorial image
14
Have your say

I didn’t see the Halifax Courier article by Craig Whittaker in which it seems he stated that he believes homosexual couples who wish to marry should not be able to do so, but I imagine that I would have agreed with it.

Dictionary definition of marriage is quite clear, in that marriage is a contract between male and female parties, for many good reasons. Matthew Eccles’ response, in the Halifax Courier of 5th October, supporting gay “”marriage””, is very interesting, being based mainly, I think, on the issue of “equal rights”. “Equal rights” are very good for many issues, but not for this issue of who may or may not marry.
The Christian, and, hence, the Church of England view, of marriage are both based on scripture, tradition and reason. This line of reasoning has, until this gay “marriage” issue was raised, been followed by the law of the land. Surely the meaning of a word - i.e. marriage, can’t be changed for the benefit of “equal rights” when, dictionary, scripture, tradition and reason make it quite clear that “marriage’ can only be for male and female parties?

Canon Michael Storey

Healey Wood Gardens,

Rastrick