Same-Sex Marriage: No Moore!

Fagburn was surprised - nay, disappointed! - that the only columnist who could be arsed to wade into the great gay marriage non-debate today with their ill-informed, quarter-baked opinions was Charles Moore, former editor of The Daily Telegraph.
Opening line; "For the entire history of civilisation, marriage has been defined as being between a man and a woman..."
BZZT! No, it hasn't.
That's the first half of your article negated, anything else?
"So if homosexuality is accepted, there is an apparent logic – and political prudence – in allowing homosexual people to do whatever everyone else does. Everyone else is permitted to marry, so why not gays?"
You tell me, duckie.
"Well, I must admit that social change has made me see more sense in this way of thinking than I did 20 years ago. But I still believe there is 'just cause and impediment'."
And that would be...
I've no idea.
For reasons only known to himself Mr Moore suddenly takes a wild detour and starts wibbling on about gay Bolivians and their cats.
I bet he'll start going on about political correctness going mad and the world having been turned upside down next.
Oops! Here we go...
"The word 'tolerance' is used, but it is not what is actually being proposed. Anything that the authorities call 'homophobic' will be treated – is already being treated – with the same intolerance that was directed, half a century ago, at anything that was called homosexual."
Any chance you could go for gold and make a completely spurious analogy, Charlie?
"Suppose that Mr Cameron had got up and told his conference, 'it shouldn’t matter whether commitment is between a man and a woman or a man and four women', would he have been able to make the audience clap?"
Textbook stuff!
And in conclusion?
"Arguments on these subjects are tricky to make, particularly in the rough world of politics."
You can say that again.
Same time next week?