Same-sex marriage isn’t a vote winner
LIKE many others, I am sick of the amount of time that the same-sex marriage debate seems to be taking up.
For the average person in the street this is not the issue that the media and the Left seem to think it is.
Stephen Morgan (Letters, Aug 21) says the Left are frustrated because they have proved their argument and presented all the evidence.
Besides the fact that those same arguments could also support bigamy and polygamy, it really isn’t about “proof”.
It is more about whether a person has an opinion, which they are entitled to, and being allowed to express and hold that position without being called a bigot.
If you survey people in the street I know you will get good support for the idea of samesex marriage.
But if you asked those same people if they would give up time on their weekends to vote in a plebiscite, I think you would get a different response.
Prime Minister Tony Abbott has said the people will vote on this issue at a later date. Can we get on to more important things now? I TAKE issue with Stephen Morgan, who resorts to namecalling to describe those defending marriage between a man and a woman as being “bigoted”.
It is not bigotry to defend the rights of children, wherever possible, to both a mother and a father.
Marriage gives every child a mum and a dad. Same-sex marriage would make that impossible because it would abolish either a mother or a father from the life of a child. It denies equality to kids.
The rights of children must take precedence over the selfish desires of adults. ROSEMARY Sargeant (Letters, Aug 20) is concerned that same-sex marriage, to our detriment, could change the foundation of our culture.
Unfortunately early marriages were more about the father’s bartering of the bride to obtain power and status, and in biblical times girls were married at a very young age and were usually betrothed before they even reached puberty.
The essence of marriage has changed and evolved over time. The fact that gays are a minority does not diminish their right to fight for equality or a redefinition of marriage.
But what is significant is that most Australians agree with them. THE Federal Government does not need the expensive exercise of either a plebiscite or a referendum about samesex marriage.
What it wants is a distraction from its blundering efforts and plummeting polls.
A plebiscite can be ignored as it is only an indication of the people’s wishes, and referendums have a poor history of success due to the way they are worded. Tony Abbott can save time and money by removing the words “between a man and a woman” which John Howard added to the Marriage Act during his time in office without any ballot of the public.
If a country as religious as Ireland can do so, then surely the multicultural “Land of a fair go” Australia can too. I AM opposed to same-sex marriage on religious grounds.
Yet I believe I do not discriminate against individual homosexuals.
I have employed many and regularly found them to be talented and reliable employees. Many have become personal and long-lasting friends of my wife and myself.
However LNP backbencher Warren Entsch’s claim that “marriage equality will eliminate discrimination” is naive and ignorant. Whatever discrimination exists by some bigoted people now will only be increased after reports from overseas where there has been legal action against ministers of religion, marriage celebrants and others in the wedding business who refuse to provide for gay marriages.
This will only widen the gap of bad feelings and discrimination between two otherwise peaceful and tolerant groups.