Response to Lyle Shelton

Background

In the small number of countries where marriage has been redefined, precious freedoms have been lost.

Children have also lost the freedom to know the love of their biological parents.  Nothing to do with Marriage Equality.  You are also showing prejudice against adoptive, foster and step parents.  Family is more than just biology.

Florists, bakers and photographers have been fined and forced into costly litigation simply for living out their belief that marriage is between one man and one woman.  Freedom of religion is not freedom to discriminate. Businesses that discriminate should not be in business.

Parents are forced to send their children to radical sex education classes. The list of consequences is long.  Sex education has nothing to do with marriage laws.

A draft bill before the federal parliament proposes to protect ministers and churches only. But professional pastors are not the only Australians who have religious freedom rights.  You obviously haven’t read the draft bill.

We hear a lot about so-called “marriage equality”. The truth is same-sex couples already have equal rights.  They don’t have a right to be accepted as next of kin.

But if marriage is redefined, those who wish to live out a different view in public will be taken to court and fined. That is not freedom. That is not the vision of Australian tolerance most of us grew up with.  You can still live out whatever view you want.  You can’t enforce those views on others. You have shown no tolerance of other views.

Already Greens’ politicians are calling us homophobes, haters and bigots because we believe in marriage. A Greens’ activist, at the urging of the same-sex marriage movement, has already dragged Hobart Archbishop Julian Porteous through a lengthy legal process simply for teaching about marriage.  Stating that “Messing with marriage” is “messing with kids” is more than simply teaching about marriage.

Imagine what will happen if the law changes. State-based anti-discrimination law will become a weapon to fine and silence those of us who will never believe in the state’s redefinition of marriage and the injustice to children it perpetuates.  Marriage and children are not co-dependent.

• Most importantly, redefining marriage forces children to miss out on either their mother or father. Children have no say in whether or not they are denied, for life, the love of their parents. Children have no say in their conception. They have no say if their parents divorce. They have no say in parental abandonment.

Australian proponents of same-sex marriage keep telling us there are no consequences of change. Many politicians believe this. But it is not true.  You have yet to demonstrate any real consequences.

This is why we must speak up now.  If the inquiry was announced before Christmas why did you leave it until now to ask for submissions?

We live in a participatory democracy. This is one issue in which we cannot afford not to participate.  Democracy is voting for parliamentary representatives not taking part in an expensive, non-binding opinion poll.

Same sex marriage

I believe saying ‘no’ to same-sex marriage is a way of showing love, not rejection. Here’s why: 

1.      It is not unloving to tell the truth about marriage. Marriage is clearly different to a same-sex relationship – for reasons of biology, sociology and anthropology. To call them the same thing is to deny the truth. As Aristotle said, “The worst form of inequality is to try and make unequal things equal.”

Marriage is not clearly different. A same-sex relationship is the same as an opposite sex relationship.  Marriage is the recognition of a relationship, it is not the relationship.  Same sex unions have their place in history and they are being accepted by society today.

2.      It is not unloving to put the rights of children first. As a society we see it as a tragedy when, due to events like desertion or death, a child misses out on the love and care of both their mum and dad. For a government to make a law that mandates this loss is not putting the rights of the child first. It is loving to ensure, where possible, every child is raised by their mother and father.

Same sex marriage does not mandate the loss of anything the same way marriage currently does not.  There is no mention of children or procreation in the Marriage Act.  The “where possible” clause is broad. Broad enough to include same sex parents.

3.      It is not unloving to fully consider the consequences of an action before taking it. Atheist columnist Brendan O’Neill warns, “everywhere gay marriage has been introduced it has battered freedom, not boosted it”. Whether it is freedom of conscience, speech or freedom for parents to remove their children from ‘sexual diversity-celebrating’ sex education classes, all have been further restricted to some degree in countries that have redefined marriage.

Freedom to not accept the situation for what it is.  Exactly what same sex advocates are being accused of.

Be Aware The Savage Breast

Why are people afraid of seeing the naked female breast in public?  Especially when it is feeding a baby.

Breastfeeding is a natural function of a mother’s breast and yet it causes such alarm when it is done in public.  Even when mother is being discrete it still causes offence.  Why is it so?  People have the option of looking away or even walking away.  Why does the discomfort need to be transferred to the mother?  Are we that distolerant a society?

A female being topless in public shouldn’t be indecent.  If men can do it, why can’t women.  Nudity doesn’t equal sex.  Naked female breasts shouldn’t be offensive.  If you go to a beach in most European countries it is accepted.

Same Sex Marriage

Marriage is the legal recognition of a union between two people.  Currently in Australia this is currently limited to a woman and man.  There is no reason, however, not to extend this definition to cover gay couples.  Not extending this definition is discrimination.

The debate over same sex marriage is separate from the supposed right of a child to have a mother and father.  You don’t need to have children to be married and you don’t need to be married to have children.

Homosexuality exists and it is not a choice.  Do you think people would choose to be persecuted, ostracised, bullied and discriminated against?  The only choices involved with being gay are choosing to accept that and choosing to be happy.

Whether or not homosexuality is a sin is not relevant.  There is more than one religious text in the same way there is more than one religion.  The only place religion has in a relationship is if it is a desired part of that relationship.  Religion has no place determining status of relationships and who can and cannot marry.

What if homosexuality is a sin?  There are other sins in the Bible.  Divorce, tattooing and piercing, drunkenness, lying, hatred, jealousy, etc.  If you hate homosexuals then that is a sin.  As it is the Bible says to love one another, love your neighbour as yourself and to love your enemies.

Critics of same sex marriage say that we are pandering to the needs of a vocal minority.  Does this mean that if you don’t conform to the majority then you have no place in society?  There are other minorities whose needs are taken into account.  People who are left-handed, dyslexics, colour-blind or vegan.  If five percent of the population are vegan should we really have vegetarian options on restaurant menus?

The traditional nuclear one mother one father family is no longer the one size fits all model any more.  There are single parents, blended families, grandparents raising grandchildren, foster families.  Prohibiting same sex marriage on the pretext that same sex couples can’t procreate doesn't fit into the way modern society works.  Adoption and IVF should not be denied to these couples for discriminatory beliefs.

Businesses that deny custom to gay people for religious reasons are out of place with modern society.  If divorce is considered a sin would they turn away someone celebrating a divorce or conducting a second, third or fourth marriage?  Is tolerance against their religion as well?