Marriage Definition Amendment Bill – 4 reasons why not

Sent in my submission today on the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill.
The short submission is here Marriage Definition Bill – Submission Ewen McQueen .

In summary – the submission opposes the Bill on the grounds that:

1) The Bill is based on the false premise that defining marriage as between a man and a woman is  discriminatory. It isn’t. It is simply defining a particular type of relationship.

2) The Bill argues that “as a social institution marriage is a fundamental human right”. This is simply wrong. Just because a particular type of relationship is a social institution, this does not give rise to a “fundamental human right” for other types of relationship to be defined as the same thing.

3) The Bill is not necessary to achieve the social inclusion of those in same-sex relationships. Cultural normalisation of same-sex relationships and the social inclusion of those in them has already been well and truly established. Legal recognition has also been provided for in the civil unions legislation.

4) The Bill is profoundly contradictory with the Judeo-Christian values and principles upon which many of our social institutions and culture are founded. In the Judeo-Christian world-view marriage has always been understood as a relationship between a husband and wife.

Ewen McQueen
October 2012

This entry was posted in Honouring Marriage. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s