The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Same sex (same old) marriage > Comments

Same sex (same old) marriage : Comments

By Kellie Toole, published 20/9/2013

However, surely in a modern liberal democracy the question of 'should gay couples be able to legally marry?' is less pertinent than the question 'should heterosexual couples be able to legally marry?'

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
The nub of the article is its statement that "The regulation of marriage draws the state into the realm of family and sexuality, which, by the definition of the liberal state, are private matters that deserve protection from the state not regulation by it".

The problem is that children are the end result of most heterosexual marriages, and it is the well-being of these children that make conventional marriage very much a matter for public concern and legal regulation. The same is not true of same sex relationships, and the article's argument for the abolition of marriage as a legal institution unwittingly provides a case for not legally recognising same-sex relationships.

Reference to marriage equality is a furphy. Men and women of all sexual orientations already have similar rights to marry a member of the opposite sex, if they so choose and are able to find a willing partner. Many bisexual or homosexual people indeed do get married in the conventional sense to an opposite sex partner, though they may not always find the role fulfilling.
Posted by Bren, Friday, 20 September 2013 3:15:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Bren,

<<Many bisexual or homosexual people indeed do get married in the conventional sense to an opposite sex partner, though they may not always find the role fulfilling.>>

Such people have none but themselves to blame.

They could marry one of their own gender, but they chose otherwise.

- Why did they do it?

- Did they, perhaps, want to receive the government's blessings?

If you go to bed with bugs, then don't be surprised to be itching in the morning!
Posted by Yuyutsu, Friday, 20 September 2013 3:43:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Yuyutsu

I don't know about receiving the government's blessings but I agree that social approval of some sort could certainly have been a consideration.

Bren
Posted by Bren, Friday, 20 September 2013 3:59:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
", and it is the well-being of these children that make conventional marriage very much a matter for public concern and legal regulation"

Bren, the fact that the well-being of children is concerned, does not automatically justify governmental regulation of sexual relationships, nor the conferring of privileges on favoured forms, and disabilities and penalties on others.

Besides, most governments have themselves legislated to try to delegitimise legitimacy; again they won't recognise their own marriage laws.

The fact that children exist, and have welfare needs, does not of itself justify any governmental action, which should be limited to protecting them from abuse of their person or, in a necessary case, neglect warranting alternative care. But that's not what the marriage laws do. And the divorce and child protection laws go far beyond that limit, purporting to take over and to better the function of the family. The result is no end of every kind of meddling by the nanny state, which is all too incapable of managing its own affairs, let alone pretending to be better at parenting than parents.

Yet again the missing concept in this mess is the very concept of liberty, which seems to have been forgotten in the rush to forcible improvement of others by the feminist and Christian fascists hell-bent on shaping everyone else in their own image by intrusive hypocritical anti-social legislation falsely parading as morally superior.
Posted by Jardine K. Jardine, Friday, 20 September 2013 4:21:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The state is still able to interfere in the lives of de-facto couples as it is and homosexuals can have children now if they want to, abolishing the legal definition of marriage won't change anything.
I favour the introduction of a generic stat dec form which notifies the government of the marriage of two people, you fill out the details, get it witnessed and notarised, pay the stamp duty or whatever and then have the wedding of your dreams.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Friday, 20 September 2013 4:46:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bren wrote 'Men and women of all sexual orientations already have similar rights to marry a member of the opposite sex, if they so choose and are able to find a willing partner.'

But Intersex people do not. There aren't many of us, but no, current law does not allow us to marry.

Perhaps you can explain why preventing us from marrying anyone is of such vital importance? According to Senator Bolkis, the new Attorney-General, it's a "moral issue". It goes against some people's religious beliefs that Intersex people be permitted to live, let alone marry.
Posted by Zoe Brain, Friday, 20 September 2013 5:10:28 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy