Jim Wells’ gay comments are none of the police’s business
Northern Ireland Health Minister Jim Wells has resigned? Why? Well, there was that comment her made, the one about gays and paedos:
“You don’t bring a child up in a homosexual relationship. That a child is far more likely to be abused and neglected….”
Ignorant balls, of course. But that’s not why Mr Wells has resigned. As he says:
“As many people are aware I have been focused on helping my wife during her fight for life. Those who know my family and I, know the last three months have been the toughest of our lives as we watched my wife, Grace, suffer two successive strokes and battle through major heart surgery. However, as she now faces further challenges I have come to the point where I am no longer able to continue my ministerial duties and give Grace the attention she deserves.”
Fair enough. But about his words linking child abuse and being gay… Well, on that he says:
“I accept that one line of what I said caused offence and deep concern. I regret having wrongly made that remark about abuse and I’m sorry those words were uttered. The comment did not reflect my view nor that of my party.”
He said sorry.
“The neglect or abuse of children is awful and happens in unstable relationships whether they are heterosexual or homosexual. I make no distinction between anyone who neglects or abuses a child regardless of their sexual orientation. I trust people will accept my explanation and my apology.”
Can we accept it? No, says LibDem leader Nick Clegg, who slips into full moralist mode:
“Those comments have lifted the lid on some really unpleasant views. The mask has slipped.”
This would be the same Nick Clegg who did not sack LibDem MP David Ward for saying that those barbric Jews still had not learnt how to behave in a civilised manner. To him the Holocaust was a lesson to Jews, and not one they have heeded:
“Having visited Auschwitz twice – once with my family and once with local schools – I am saddened that the Jews, who suffered unbelievable levels of persecution during the Holocaust, could within a few years of liberation from the death camps be inflicting atrocities on Palestinians in the new State of Israel and continue to do so on a daily basis in the West Bank and Gaza.”
“It appears that the suffering by the Jews has not transformed their views on how others should be treated”
It was an insult designed to reduce Jews as people and undermine their history.
But was it the “mark slipping” on the LibDems? Clegg never said it was. Ward kept his job.
Clegg’s not alone. Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness said Mr Wells’ position as health minister was “no longer tenable”.
“I accept that he is under pressure as a result of his wife’s serious illness and I acknowledge that he has apologised. However, I think those words will ring hollow when judged against the DUP’s opposition to marriage equality, its support for a ban on blood donations from gay men and opposition to adoption by gay couples.”
And that’s it: speaking out about gay marriage is to go against the orthodoxy. So on-mesage is it that the that the police are investigating. What have the police to do with politics and belief? Who invited them? Who gave them a rainbow mask?
PS: Slugger O’Toole has more on gay marriage
“While Sinn Féin support remains high in the Catholic community, they do not, however, have the support of Catholics who are committed to the cause of life and marriage….Catholics understand therefore, that a vote for Sinn Féin is a vote for the weakening of the institution of marriage and the right to life for all the unborn.””
And the DUP being praised..by the same Catholic Priests. Fr. Owen Gorman, parish priest in Aghadrumsee, wrote in Catholic monthly newspaper ‘Alive’ :
“Catholics have started to support Peter Robinson’s Democratic Unionist Party (DUP)…the most consistently pro-life and pro-traditional marriage party in Northern Ireland.”
And a similar points by Father Tim Bartlett from the Catholic Council for Social Affairs onBBC The View .
Having had a debate on Twitter with an SDLP member who defined marriage as being based solely on love I have to wonder where such a definition logically ends.
Such a basis would surely be a can of worms yet many in favour of gay marriage fail to see that defining marriage solely on the basis of love opens marriage to all sorts of relationships. ( In Brazil, an uncle and niece may have a relationship provided they undergo health checks & in parts of the US, first cousins may marry if they are beyond reproductive age or ability. Sweden allows marriage between siblings who share a parent.)
Why must gay marriage be supported by everyone or else?
Posted: 27th, April 2015 | In: News, Politicians Comment | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink