Skip to comments.Gay marriage becomes legal in Britain as Queen Elizabeth II gives royal approval
Posted on 07/17/2013 6:37:49 AM PDT by informavoracious
LONDON Gay marriage becomes legal in Britain as Queen Elizabeth II gives royal approval.
(Excerpt) Read more at m.washingtonpost.com ...
So when the she dies will Prince Charles be the next Queen ?
And so goes the British Empire...
It’s not surprising when queens are “for gay marriage”.
That ship sailed a long time ago.
BBC Footage directly relating to this event : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFBOQzSk14c
Just the next sad step.
Prince Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowels are first in line.
Won’t this offend their Moslem masters?
You mean they've legalized marriage between a man and a horse?
Historically, the Monarchy has been full of gays for centuries-and they have been marrying( albeit for appearances), is anyone surprised? Wonder how the Muslims who are taking over Great Britain feel about this? Although they practice homosexuality ‘unofficially’.
Seems that the free world has a tougher time winning in peacetime than winning during a war. Too much time on their hands I guess.
Interesting, isn't it? Kind of like La Raza not supporting Zimmerman.
Yeah but now the harbor is blocked and the ship is listing.
Guess z-man was not aliberal enough man of color
Some “Guardian of The Faith” she turned out to be.
BTW, I couldn't care less about the royal family and never have, even Princess Diana, although she did some good. I've long wondered why the British even give a crap about their over-indulgent and silly royalty nowadays. They long ago stopped having any influence in the political process. Why should anyone care?
What's with the Britons? Guess a cultural thing. But then, we have the baby watch on all news channels for Princess-who-gives-a-shit. So what? Babies are born everyday, except for those who kill them in the womb.
Maybe it's a case of learning from the past when they were behind the times of the Colonialists and other conquests and control, and now trying to make up for it with coddling Islamists and political correct types? Pfft.
Approved by the Queen, who is the head of the Anglican Church...
“The Queen Approves Gay Marriage” has to rate some sort of Irony Tag of the Day.
The Rulers of once Great Britain don't care what the Muslims think any more than they care what the Homosexualists think. They are only using the Muslims and Homosexualists as batter rams to knock down Western Civilization.
I thought that she was pleaged to protect and preserve the Church?
Wonder if that means that an heir to the throne can marry a person of the same sex. Hmmmm.
You know what, you hit it squarely on the head. Robert Bork's book, "Slouching Towards Gomorrah - Modern Liberalism and American Decline" cleary states why we have sunk into socialism. It's kinda old (1996), but is even more relevant today and it explains why the children of the Boomer generation went so far off the path with their 60's radicalism and beyond.
To summarize: The boomers were successful and wanted the best for their children, so they over-indulged them. With little financial worries; no taught work ethic; questionable moral developement; few demands on them as in chores/duty; and no direction they tried to find something new. They embraced socialism and actually communism. If you like, I will give you an example of a failed commune near Los Angeles during the late 60's. Saw it first hand.
Bork's book is very enlightening as to how we got so far away from our Constitutional roots and workable society values and that was back in 1996 after the libs "Borked" him out of a USSC nomination.
Which lead to Anthony Kennedy being on the bench to vote against REAL marriage.....
Thanks for making me laugh!
I’ll bet Obama’s son is spinning in his grave.
BTW, if this is true and Liz has a gay grandson, there could one day be two queens on the throne.
This whole Anglican/Episcopal experiment seems to have failed miserably.
Of course he could.
An heir to the throne can be or do anything he wants - except be a Catholic, which is the only disqualification.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
At least she allowed a vote.
There have been three on the British throne for which a case has been made: William II, Edward II, James I.
That's maybe 3 out of about 60.
The Queen has no power to withhold her assent from an Act approved by Parliament, unless she is advised that it is unconstitutional. In her 60 odd years as monarch she’s probably had to assent to a lot more Acts of which she privately disapproves than those of which she approves. We will never know, since the Queen does not have public opinions.
Remember how they used to hang the blood-stained sheet out the window to prove consummation and the bride's virginity? I would hate to see the stained sheet from the "consummation" of one of these "marriages."
Legalizing gay marriage while simultaneously turning over swaths of your nation to Islamists who are violently opposed to homosexuality. Yeah, that’s going to work out well in the future.
Royal assent does not imply personal approval. The monarch is apolitical, and constitutionally required to give assent to laws passed by Parliament.
Assuming she objects, the Queen probably made that known to the prime minister prior to the bill being read in Parliament. She has the right to advise him. But once it passes the legislature and the House of Lords, she has no further say.
Will some Royal couple one day be King/King or Queen/Queen? Sorry I asked.
Politically speaking, Northern Ireland does not have the wild liberalism of England. So, I assume Northern Ireland is still straight, hope so.
Wales and Scotland are probably going along with it, unfortunately. Scotland is going to have a vote from what I understand to leave the United Kingdom.
“...That ship sailed a long time ago. ...”
Yeah, round about the time a document was delivered to a certain mad monarch that started with the words:
“When In The Course Of Human Events, it becomes necessary to....”
I thought Prince Charles said he wants to marry a tampon.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.
Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage.
Thanks for sharing the relevancy of Bork's book (I read his "Tempting of America, the Political Seduction of the Law" which helped inspire me to go after a law degree.)
I also see these truths prophesied in the Bible:
Chapters 2 & 3 of the Book of Revelation lay out the seven ages of what would be the next 2000 years. I believe the Philadelphia age (Philadelphia church age) ended around 1900. In the period before 1900 America and in a sense the whole world began to go "from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance."
Since around 1900, I believe have we entered into (and are now in) the seventh and last age, the Laodicean age. This is the age where people say to themselves "I am rich and my wealth is increasing and have need of nothing" (Rev 3:17). It is truly astonishing the industrial and technological advances we have seen in the last 100 years, never before seen in the history of the world. We can do and have things now that people even 200 years ago could hardly even dream about. You can basically go anywhere and do anything you want to in air conditioned comfort.
This is the period where people have gone "from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage." Likewise, Jesus in response to these people's thoughts says, "[You] do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked" (Rev 3:17) and then in love and grace counsels them what to do.
Though by which The United States were founded.
I agree. She had an opportunity to show leadership in vetoing it, or whatever the analogous term is in GB. I was an admirer of hers—until today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.