Some questions for Ger Brennan, Dublin footballer who advocated No in Ireland's Same Sex Marriage Referendum in 2015.

Why do Christians who oppose same sex marriage and civil partnerships all claim to have gay friends? Many people do not have gay friends.

Why did he write for Alive! which is a trashy religious tabloid full of hate and abuse for gay people and atheists and which is notorious for refusing to correct its lies?

If he is such a strong believer, what does he think of God's alleged declaration in the Bible that a man lying with a man is an abomination and they have nobody to blame but themselves for being stoned to death? Jesus took responsibility for writing this for he said he agreed with the Old Testament and that it was God's infallible word. Jesus if he claimed to be God claimed to be the divine author. Also Jesus said that the Old Testament would not be done away but toughened up and that whoever relaxed its rules would be cursed in the kingdom of Heaven. What about the New Testament teaching which is even more savage than the Old Testament and claims that gay people who engage in sex commit a sin so bad that it merits being banned from any happiness after death and indeed will result in that unless it is repented? Ger is lying about his homophobia for he certainly knows of these dark and harsh and twisted teachings and though he isn't violent he still tacitly supports the evil commanded by his Bible.


We must remember too that evil has to look good to succeed so don't chip in with, "But Ger is such a nice person despite his belief in the Bible." Human nature is notorious for enabling evil with a smile. A truly decent person does not even contemplate honouring an evil book as the word of God. He throws it away. The good bits are a reason for rejecting it not accepting it. Something that advocates good and teaches good and then teaches its opposite is worse than something that means well but does little else but damage. Evil needs to be softened by having lots of good put into the mix. That way it does more harm than shamelessly blatant and undiluted evil.

It is homophobia Ger to lie that this referendum is about children when it is not. Don't use children to get your way. The referendum merely wishes to see two people of the same sex recognised as family in the eyes of the law just as the law already would recognise a heterosexual couple who are too old to have sex or reproduce as married. It says nothing about a right to have children. It is not asking anybody to have children.


In the run-up to Ireland's same sex marriage referendum, campaigners need to emphasise that how the law defines marriage is its own business and/or that of the electorate. Thus it is not right to expect the law to define marriage the way the Church would. The law's job is to look after the people as people and not as religious people. Only that guarantees equality. We must remember too that life is about compromise. Most jobs require you to support or engage in things you may consider immoral. But you have to get on with the job. The Church recognises this as it seeks a relationship even with the state when it allows things the Church considers to be intolerable on religious or ethical grounds. That the Church will not comply if required by state law to facilitate same sex marriages indicates a refusal to compromise. The Church will base the refusal on moral grounds but this is hypocritical. The refusal indicates direct and indirect hate for same sex couples - same sex marriage must be a worse evil than making arms in a factory if that refusal is warranted. The Church is paid good money by the flock to nourish it spiritually. It is wrong for the Church to refuse to care what the majority want when their money makes the church exist. The Church implies this logic is correct for it says, "Most taxpayers are Christian so it is mere justice for the state to finance Church schools with their money". Christianity must be willing to serve the people instead of putting anybody's wishes first - even those of Jesus Christ. Happiness matters more than obedience to Jesus. Jesus did say that God prefers mercy to the religious rite of sacrifice. Finally we need to ask if protecting marriage is the same thing as protecting the family? It is not for the family can be legally protected without it.
A pinknews comment said the government should let religious people refuse to perform same-sex marriage

The comment goes "religious people should not interfere in anything concerning same-gender civil marriage" - but they can and will through voting and running for public office and influencing voters and any public representatives who care to listen.

The notion that the state must exempt religion from the law violates the separation that needs to exist between religion and the state. The state must see its citizens not as religion or religions but as individuals. It treats the person as a human being not as a religion. Thus while registrars must be given the right to refuse to perform any marriage, if they won't do same sex marriages they are in the wrong job. Also, they perform marriages in the name of the state not their own name. So it is nonsense to imagine that a Christian who is registrar at a same sex marriage is enabling something he or she sees as sin. Yet that is what the Christian will claim - that they are being asked to agree with what their conscience forbids. They are being asked to uphold the law not to violate their conscience. The law is not about their conscience.

The main thing about conscience is that it should be about obeying the law of the land for the common good. For example, if the law commands registrars to perform same sex marriages - even if they think it is wrong - then the registrars should obey. Conscience cannot be an excuse for disobedience. Obeying the law takes precedence over any other moral difficulties the person may have with obeying the law. We all have to compromise our consciences and the law. For example, you pay your taxes though they might be used to wage an unfair war. We all compromise so why can't registrars and doctors who are anti-abortion? The law has the right to make registrars and doctors do things they claim are wrong - period!

No Copyright