Do you think the Iona Institute are homophobic?

Bannasidhe wrote: »

The discussion within the Gay Community is nuanced. The message coming out of Iona isn't. Their message is 'black vs white' as you put it. It consists of stating that homosexual relationships are not equal to heterosexual relationships and should be treated accordingly. Very black and white viewpoint no?

And why do they think it’s not equal? To extrapolate on that their actual message is more nuanced (surprise , surprise) by saying that heterosexual relationships are unique in the manner because normally children arise from such a union. Physically gay couples cannot naturally have kids. They can of course adopt, foster, surrogacy options .etc.. but they themselves cannot 'make' a child by having intercourse the same way as heterosexual couples do. This is a plain fact unless some weird gene altering therapy comes to market in the future.
Maybe they think this because it’s the will God, or the well-trodden ‘Don’t mess with nature’. The latter is kind of Darwinian ironically.
You can of course disagree with this saying that what is important to a child is a loving stable secure household in which to grow up in. Doesn’t matter if its two guys, two girls or one of each at its head. I am somewhat in that agreement. However, I also think depending on the situation, the child, the environment, the culture that having a father/mother who take up their respective traditional roles as parents is not far wrong either. Who is to say what is best or better? What we do know is that the breakdown of marriage, single mothers trying to raise kids without a father in tough neighbourhood creates huge amount of social problems down the line especially with young men. One just has to look at inner city London and inner city American neighbour hoods to see the mess this has created.

I wrote a paragraph on the concept of marriage and how it’s now looked upon as a romantic notion is very new. This was ignored as people are not actually interested in examining or discussing marriage itself, what it means, what it was and what it will be in the future or indeed what it should be. Maybe Starkey is right, marriage is an outdated concept but we stick to it via nostalgia and tradition. People are certainly not interested in looking and examine ways to stop marriages or unions from breaking down with the self-evident results of children being permanently psychology damaged as a results. I have raised these points before. NOBODY cared to discuss them. Much easier to raise the pitch forks and beat a hobby horse. All anyway seems to want to talk about it is "Iona are bad!! m'kay".