Is the Magna Carta homophobic? The root of our enjoyed liberties enjoyed by ALL today

I was taught about the Magna Carta when I went to school but today it seems it is not even known by the youth of today.
It IS the source of our liberties we know and enjoy today but these liberties are all under attack today by fringe groups that seek minority rights at the expense of all liberties.

I feel they don't teach this because that is the goal, to destroy our liberties. They fund and promote fringe groups as mainstream in their place usually taking a small minority as the mantle and lead using the "rights of minorities" as the excuse, even children.
But the bigger picture gets obscured because lets face it, we all want liberty and freedom so it makes sense to the forming ideologies that simply do not know any better. And the media sells it.

snip*Perhaps it is only a matter of time, then, before leftist historians discover threads of “homophobia” lurking in the Magna Carta, drafted circa 1215 A.D. This would be no small thing, for as professor Anthony Esolen recently reminded us, much of our modern liberty is rooted in the English Magna Carta. Could it be that the so-called “religious right” was alive and well some nine centuries ago, cannily inserting “homophobic” principles into civil law?

As silly as it would be to think that the same-sex “marriage” debate raged in the 1200s, it happens that Professor Esolen inadvertently revealed one of the metaphysical reasons why marriage between one man and one woman is something radically different than any same-sex relationship. In the April, 2011 edition of First Things he writes:

By signing Magna Carta, the king conceded that there were many centers of authority besides his own, from that of his enemy the belligerent duke down to that of the free man in his home.
These other centers of authority were embedded in a history of their own that rightly commanded reverence. Therefore the right of inheritance is the most jealously guarded liberty in Magna Carta. You may not pillage a man’s castle simply because he happens to have died. We mistake the matter entirely if we consider such a right only in terms of wealth retained. The right of inheritance allowed a family the same kind of being extending through the centuries that the nation enjoyed. It honored the family as not merely a biological happenstance within the state but as a metaphysical and political reality that preceded the state.

blog.speakupmovement.org...


I want to clarify a few things.
I am against the redefinition of "marriage", which I believe to be a religious institution but am all for the civil unions that grant by law the things that the gay marriage crowd seek.
It's a matter of commerce so why not?
But for the sake of liberty, we are heading in the direction of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. And we will all suffer as a result.
Those that do not know their history are doomed to repeat it. Are we going back to the liberties enjoyed through the dark ages if this persists?