adminare looking at redefining the word marriage so it would allow same sex couples to be married in civil ceremonies. Under current laws, such couples can undertake a civil partnership but it cannot be called a marriage.
President Mugabe is on record saying the homosexual and lesbian population will be punished severely for their behaviour which is inconsistent with Christian values. He criticised British Prime Minister David Cameron who said that London will not aid countries that do not respect gay rights.
“To come with that diabolical suggestion to our people is a stupid offer,” Mugabe said.
During the new constitution outreach programmes, Zimbabweans unequivocally affirmed that homosexuality should be outlawed. The barring of homosexuals is expected as Zimbabwe is a nation founded on tradition and Christianity.
The Council of African Apostles last week ordered the United Kingdom and United States of America to withdraw their statement urging African leaders to adopt gay rights.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon also recently came under fire for his recent statement that African leaders should respect gay rights. African Christian leaders representing
the sub-regions of Africa demanded that the African Union lead the discussion on this matter. They said that the gay rights agenda is being pushed by leaders who have not
concluded this matter in their countries.
“We do not believe that homosexuality is a natural condition and such we oppose any attempt to legislate it into our constitution. We demand that aid in whatever form should not be tied to morals, principles or religious beliefs. We find it morally irresponsible of Western powers to attach the adoption of gay rights to development support,” read the statement.
Archbishop Vincent Nichols wrote: “This week, the coalition government is expected to present its consultation paper on the proposed change in the legal definition of marriage so as to open the institution of marriage to same-sex partnerships.
“Today we want to put before you the Catholic vision of marriage and the light it casts on the importance of marriage for our society.
“The roots of the institution of marriage lie in our nature. Male and female we have been created, and written into our nature is this pattern of complementarity and fertility.”
The archbishop added: “The reasons given by our government for wanting to change the definition of marriage are those of equality and discrimination. But our present law does not discriminate unjustly when it requires both a man and a woman for marriage. It simply recognises and protects the distinctive nature of marriage.
“A change in the law would gradually and inevitably transform society’s understanding of the purpose of marriage. It would reduce it just to the commitment of the two people involved.
“There would be no recognition of the complementarity of male and female or that marriage is intended for the procreation and education of children.”
Outside Westminster Cathedral, Sky News met Matais Wibowo. He is a Catholic. He is also gay and next year he is going to America where he can be married to his partner.
“For me marriage is an inseparable issue in relation to equality and human rights. The church should have the honesty to observe the conversations going on at the kitchen tables about homophobia,” he said.
Liberal Democrat MP Steven Williams, who is gay, said the letter’s language was not inflammatory, compared to a letter written last week by the head of Catholic Church in Scotland, Cardinal Keith Obrien, who called the changes “madness”.
“But I just think we have to recognise that there is a fundamental difference of opinion between the Catholic Church as to what the meaning of marriage is and between many politicians and the state ultimately.”
Mr Williams, added that the coalition government’s proposals were very straight-forward.
“All the Government is doing is having a consultation on whether civil partnerships can instead be called civil marriages. Just like couples of the opposite sex who go to a registry office or a hotel and get married and have a civil marriage, same sex couples ought to be able to do the same so when they walk through the door, their rights are already exactly the same but what they call their relationship is the same as well.”
A Home Office spokeswoman said the Government believed that “if a couple love each other” and want to commit to a life together they should “have the option of a civil marriage irrespective of their sexual orientation”.
Last week, Mr Cameron’s spokesman said the Prime Minister was a passionate advocate of the change.
At last year’s party conference in Manchester, Mr Cameron said: “I don’t support gay marriage in spite of being a Conservative. I support gay marriage because I am a Conservative.”
Ben Summerskill, chief executive of gay rights organisation Stonewall, said: “At a time when 50 000 families in Britain are homeless and a billion people across the world live on less than a dollar a day, it’s extraordinary that Archbishops are worrying about the family arrangements of a few thousands gay people.
Human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell echoed Mr Summerskill’s comments, branding it “bizarre” that the Archbishops had chosen to mobilise their congregations against gay marriage “given the many grave problems in the world” like war, hunger and poverty.
“It shows a perverse sense of moral priorities,” he said.
“The Archbishops are preaching a gospel of division and discrimination.
“They want the law to discriminate against gay couples. Discrimination is not a Christian value.
“If churches value love and commitment, why are they opposing gay couples showing their love and commitment by getting married?”— news.sky.com/Herald Reporter.
Online Reporter