Church in Wales to embrace polygamy next?

"A man with two boyfriends had asked where the [Green] party stood on polyamory" - Independent

One of the more alarming claims I heard in the run-up to the 2015 General Election was that the Green party was open to the possibility of three in a marriage. Not as Princess Diana described it but legally, adding the seal of approval to polygamy. 

From the Independent, 1 May 2015: 

"Natalie Bennett has said her party is 'open to consultation' on the possibility of legalising polygamy and civil partnerships involving three or more people. The Green Party leader was responding to a question from a man living with his two boyfriends in a polyamorous relationship in London on Friday.

Dr Redfern Jon Barrett, taking part in an event organised by Pink News, said people like himself in three-way relationships faced a 'considerable amount of legal discrimination'. He asked: 'As someone living with his two boyfriends in a stable long-term relationship, I would like to know your stance is on polyamory rights. Is there room for Green support on group civil partnerships or marriages?'

Ms Bennett replied that although the Green Party 'at present' has no specific policy on legal partnerships involving more than two people, members could develop one and vote for it to be introduced. 'We have led the way on many issues related to the liberalisation of legal status in adult consenting relationships, and we are open to further conversation and consultation on this issue,' she added."

Politically the Green Party may have led the way on many issues related to the 'liberalisation of legal status in adult consenting relationships' but in the Church the champion of liberalisation in Great Britain is the Archbishop of Wales. I have been unable to find an official report of the proceedings but Dr Morgan secured an overwhelming vote in favour of his same-sex marriage proposals at the extraordinary meeting of the Llandaff Diocesan Conference held in Aberdare on May 9 to discuss the matter.

Not that it has any more relevance than voting at Parish and Deanery level because the Bench of Bishops have endorsed ++Barry's decision that they alone will decide the issue after the measure has been massaged through the Governing Body, just as they did when they denied traditional Anglicans a meaningful Code of Practice, contrary to the wishes expressed at Diocesan conferences organised at considerable expense to obtain the views of Church in Wales members.

After same-sex marriage polygamy is the next logical step for people in stable, long-term polyamorous relationships who love one another. If same-sex marriage is acceptable what possible objection can there be if two or more people love each other? Justifying their legislation Government Ministers said: "Put simply, it's not right that a couple who love each other and want to formalise a commitment to each other should be denied the right to marry."

Supporters of same-sex marriage who want the Church to be involved use 'love' as justification because love is at the heart of Christianity. It is. Christ said, "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another", which raises the question whether the Bench understands the meaning of true discipleship.

What can the Bench of Bishops be thinking about to go along with this misguided secular campaign? The price being paid is in direct opposition to Christ's prayer that we all may be one. As a result of ++Barry's misguided political policies, ecumenism between the Catholic and the Anglican Churches may be ending:

"Questions are being raised about whether the ecumenism between the Catholic and Anglican churches is coming to an end. According to Crux, many ask is there any point in the ecumenism as female bishops and gay bishops are present in Anglican churches, and they are now well-along the path toward same-sex marriage." Report here.

'Plural marriage' is currently out of favour in Mormonism but eager bed-fellows will be found in Islam. So the Archbishop of Wales will retire in the knowledge that in terms of marriage the Church in Wales could have more in common with Islam than with the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of which he claims membership. What a legacy!

The Ministry of Chaos strikes again

I can't think of a more absurd excuse than the Transport Secretary's for increasing the speed limit to 80 MPH on motorways in England and Wales - 'because so many motorists already break the law and the police don't enforce it'. This from the 'party of law and order'! Police forces have already blamed scarce resources for failure to monitor speed violations so where will they find the resources to fulfil a promise to monitor the new 80 MPH limit with far fewer resources? When they do check, the most common formula applied for giving 'leeway' is '10% plus 2mph' = 79mph before action is taken. If the same formula were applied the actual top speed is more likely to be 90 MPH. 

Good reasons for challenging Mr Hammond's decision are outlined in the BBC report here yet many are in favour of the change. This is hardly surprising if so many people flout the law, illustrated by this Guardian poll which, at the time of writing, shows 68% and rising in favour of the change with two days to go for voting. Surely every shop-lifter, pimp or drug pusher would vote to legitimise their law breaking if given half a chance.

Even if the reason given were legitimate, there is a much better case for reducing the speed limit. The Green Party's chief scientist is quoted in the BBC link (above) as saying that there was a 20% increase in fuel consumption and emissions between driving at 70 and 80. Reducing oil consumption and emissions are important environmental considerations which should be given extra weight. I also question the suggestion that everything must be done at a quicker pace. Consideration for others, on and off the road, is now barely noticeable. If anything, we need to slow down and restore the better mannered culture of 'after you' which was far less stressful. 


Postscript
I have just been reading the news about the M4 being shut this afternoon after a six vehicle crash. Not long ago South Wales was virtually cut-off when the nearby  Brynglas Tunnels were closed after a serious accident. The supposed few minutes saved on journey times by increasing the speed limit will be more than outweighed by the predicted increase in accidents and will cost more lives. The government appears unconcerned with the 1% predicted increase conveniently forgetting that it is 100% for the unlucky ones, often at no fault of their own.