Sir Paul Coleridge, a senior judge in the family division of England’s High Court, lashed out at British government proposals to legislate for ‘gay marriage’, telling The Times newspaper in an exclusive interview that it was a minority issue affecting 0.1 per cent of the UK population.

'Sad and unwise’

Sir Paul, who recently founded a charity campaigning to prevent family breakdown and to protect traditional marriage, told the newspaper that his organisation did not have a formal stance on homosexual union, but that: ‘The breakdown of marriage and its impact on society affects 99.9 per cent of the population. That is where the investment of time and money should be ...’
His remarks triggered criticism from homosexual rights groups and some lawyers. The Times quoted Richard Moorhead, director of the Centre for Ethics and Law at University College London, as labelling the judge’s comments as ‘sad and unwise’. Prof Moorhead went on to tell the paper that it was questionable whether ‘judges [should] enter into public debates with fatuous statistics’.
Others agreed. The newspaper reported that Adam Wagner, a barrister at London chambers 1 Crown Office Row, posted on the social network Twitter: ‘My Boxing Day message to the judiciary: shhh. 0.1 per cent is rubbish.’

Controversial technique

Meanwhile, a US Appeals Court ruled at the end of last week that California's ban on a controversial technique claiming to reverse homosexuality must be withdrawn while its constitutionality is challenged.
The Reuters news agency reports that state governor Jerry Brown signed the ban into law last September. And the legislation withstood an initial challenge in a US District court, but that ruling was overturned by the appeal court last week.
The challenge is being mounted by the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality and the American Association of Christian Counsellors, in addition to a group of unnamed individuals.
But the news agency quotes senior state lawyers as vowing to fight for the ban’s reinstatement. A spokeswoman for the California Attorney General’s office said: ‘California was correct to outlaw this unsound and harmful practice, and the Attorney General will vigorously defend this law.’