All slogans are lies – for what they leave out as much as what they say.
August 2017 and here in Australia there’s more space given to same sex marriage than there is to World War 3. Unless the figures have changed, the percentage of gay and lesbian persuasion still stands at about 10% of the population.
We’re having a non-binding postal vote on the subject of same sex marriage and it’s unfortunate and ‘by design’ that the question is likely to be phrased ‘Are you in favour of same sex marriage?’ There are actually two questions being asked.
If the question were asked of me – ‘Are you in favour of same sex couples having the same legal rights and responsibilities as heterosexual couples?’ – I would answer ‘Yes.’
If I were asked – ‘Are you in favour of redefining the word ‘marriage’ – my answer would be ‘No.’
This isn’t a trivial matter. Marriage has always been defined or rather been understood as being between a man and a woman. Cuts across all religions and every culture. The family, whether a family of two or greater, is the building block of every society. I see no reason, other than a desire, for changing that definition.
‘You’re on the wrong side of history, dad, ... me and my friends are in favour, we don’t care.’
I’ve paraphrased that quote because it’s the ... ‘..we don’t care.’ which niggles at the edge of my mind. Of course they care and it’s why they’re in favour of same sex marriage. They see it as a matter of unnecessary discrimination – as simple as that. They haven’t seen that there are two questions being asked – all dressed up in a neat little slogan. ‘Same sex marriage.’
The rainbow coalition looks like it encompasses every shade of sexuality but, if that were true, then it should include – paedophilia, bestiality and whatever the imagination can dream up. Does it?
‘All love is equal.’ ... define love. Not so hard to name aspects of love – selflessness, compassion, empathy and so on, but to suggest that ‘All love is equal’ doesn’t stand scrutiny if love means differing things to differing people. And it does.
This isn’t about whether or not two women can bring up children in a safe caring environment – they’ve been doing so regardless of convention because men went to war and never came back ... or for many reasons. The family was never ideal and neither was marriage.
Am I in favour of change? Depends, doesn’t it.