Wednesday, March 18, 2009

The Australian Marriage Equality group claims same sex marriage is a matter of fundamental human rights

Australian Marriage Equality, Alex Greenwich, Nancy Polikoff, Human Rights Consultation Committee

Australian Marriage Equality spokesperson Alex Greenwich said the lobby group is calling on community members to write to the Human Rights Consultation Committee in support for full legal marriage for same-sex partners. Greenwich claims that laws preventing same-sex marriage violate the right to equality before the law, the right not to be discriminated against and the right to marriage and family life.”

Greenwich fails to acknowledge that people with a same sex attraction are allowed to get married, they just can't marry someone from the same sex. There is no discrimination involved. We must all follow the rules with regard to who you can marry. In Australia we are not allowed to marry another person if we are already married, marry a sibling or marry someone who is underage. We are also not allowed to marry someone of the same sex. Every one is treated equally, the rules apply to everyone regardless.

There is disagreement as to what type of same sex arrangement same sex couples want. The AME group has dismissed civil unions saying that “A growing number of courts around the world have found that civil unions do not solve the problem of legal inequality and discrimination. Professor Nancy Polikoff from the Washington College of Law claims that marriage should be done away with altogether and a new term “civil partnership” be used to describe a marriage between couples regardless of their sexual orientation.

The real issue here is, what is a same sex marriage? What are the basic principles which define what it is? In other words, what is its core meaning? Another issue Australians need to consider is how will a “gay marriage” benefit society? Marriages have special privileges and benefits under the law because they benefit society, but how would a “gay marriage” benefit society?

Marriage is not an invention of society, religion or the state, but a part of human nature. The very nature of marriage resides within human nature itself. For this reason we cannot change the core meaning of what marriage is, sex integration between a man and a woman and the contingency for responsible procreation. While the law could be rewritten to coerce society into treating people in homosexual unions as if they were married, this would not give them the reality of marriage. It would not change the nature of their union to correspond to what marriage actually is. All society would be doing is playing a word game, stretching the term marriage so that it no longer picks out a particular human reality.

AME has developed a toolkit to help community members show their support for same sex marriage. The kit advises people on how to make a personal submission to the national inquiry into human rights. I encourage everyone to contact the Human Rights Consultation Committee and voice your support for marriage as being between one man and one woman. Marriage really is equality of the sexes since both sexes are represented. A same sex union discriminates against the other sex.


1 comment:

Euripides said...

Looks like Australia is also plagued with people who have no common sense about marriage. How can marriage represent anything but a union between a man and a woman with the possibility of creating a family? The family is under attack here. If the family goes, society will follow.